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 .
Status of Claims
This application is now under the examination of Examiner Jagolinzer.
This action is in reply to the amendments filed on 10/28/2025.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 1, 7, 9, and 16 are amended.
Claims 6 and 15 are cancelled.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 are currently rejected.
This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive.
Regarding the 101 rejections, in light of the amendments and arguments the 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with regards to the art rejections have been considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that because Gate has a validation step it does not teach the “determining” and “executing” limitations “without requiring autonomous vehicle validation prior to implementation, thereby reducing delay in executing trajectory components.” Applicant’s arguments appear to argue limitations or results no presently claimed. The current claims do not preclude a validation step and that step being present in Gate does not stop it from performing the claimed limitations as currently presented. Claim 7 of applicant also adds in a validation step which counters their arguments of it being unable to be performed with claim 1 since claim 7 is dependent upon claim 1. Therefore applicants arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are being maintained.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gate et. al. (US 11,820,401), herein Gate.
Regarding claim 1:
Gate teaches:
a method to control an autonomous vehicle comprising (a method may include, in an autonomous vehicle operating in an environment, communicating context data collected by the autonomous vehicle from the environment in which the autonomous vehicle operates to a teleoperations system in communication with and remote from the autonomous vehicle to provide situational awareness to the teleoperations system, in the autonomous vehicle, receiving path data from the teleoperations system generated in response to virtual path suggestion input defining a virtual path of travel, and in the autonomous vehicle and in response to the path data, generating a path for the autonomous vehicle that causes the autonomous vehicle to follow the virtual path of travel defined by the path data [col 2, lines 35-48]):
receiving a first signal, the first signal comprising a first set of parameters that define a planned trajectory for the autonomous vehicle (Direction control 112 may include one or more actuators and/or sensors for controlling and receiving feedback from the direction or steering components to enable the vehicle to follow a desired trajectory [col 6, lines 51-54]);
receiving a second signal, the second signal comprising a second set of parameters that define a planned trajectory for the autonomous vehicle (receiving a map alteration command from the teleoperations system generated in response to the context data, modifying one or more elements in the mapping data used by the autonomous vehicle in response to the map alteration command, and controlling the autonomous vehicle using the mapping data subsequent to modifying the one or more elements such that a path of the autonomous vehicle is determined based at least in part on the modified one or more elements [col 3, lines 15-23]);
generating a third signal (A teleoperations system may also be used in some implementations to modify mapping data used by an autonomous vehicle and thereby enable the autonomous vehicle to proceed with planning a path or trajectory based upon the updated mapping data [col 20, lines 43-47]) by modifying the first set of parameters of the first signal to include the second set of parameters of the second signal (modification of an element represented in mapping data may include modifying a location of an element and/or modifying data describing that element. In the context of the examples presented above for example, mapping data modifications may modify elements representing lanes or pathways to effectively change a status of at least a portion of a roadway to mark those lanes or pathways as open or closed and/or modify a speed limit associated with those lanes or pathways, such that when an autonomy component of an autonomous vehicle determines a path or trajectory for the vehicle, the modified elements will be used in that determination [col 21, lines 46-56]);
outputting the third signal (block 406 generates a map alteration command and communicates the command to the vehicle, which is received in block 408. In some implementations, the map alteration command may include modified mapping data or instructions for modifying the mapping data stored in the autonomous vehicle, while in other implementations the modification of the mapping data stored by the autonomous vehicle may be performed by the autonomous vehicle itself based upon receipt of the command [col 24, lines 37-45]);
determining trajectory components to implement a trajectory defined by the third signal (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]); and
executing the trajectory defined by the third signal, including executing the trajectory components at a drive by wire system of the autonomous vehicle (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]).
Regarding claim 2:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein, the first set of parameters are obtained from a library of predefined parameters, the library of predefined parameters including predefined deterministic behaviors for the autonomous vehicle in response to a stimulus (a Relative Atlas Subsystem (RAS) 160 may be provided in the illustrated implementations to describe the elements within an environment and the relationships therebetween. RAS 160 may be accessed by each of the localization, planning and perception subsystems 152-156 to obtain various information about the environment for use in performing their respective functions. RAS 160 may be used to provide mapping data to the autonomous vehicle control system, which may be used for various purposes in an autonomous vehicle, including for localization, planning, and perception, among other purposes. Mapping data may be used, for example, to lay out or place elements within a particular geographical area, including, for example, elements that represent real world objects such as roadways, boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), buildings, traffic devices (e.g., traffic signs, lights, etc.), as well as elements that are more logical or virtual in nature, e.g., elements that represent valid pathways a vehicle may take within an environment (referred to hereinafter as “gates”), “virtual” boundaries such as lane markings, or elements that represent logical collections or sets of other elements. [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]).
Regarding claim 3:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 2, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the predefined deterministic behaviors include at least one of throttle control, brake control, steering control to maintain lane-keeping, distance control to maintain distance between the autonomous vehicle and other vehicles, overtaking other vehicles on the left, collision avoidance, or merging (a control system 110 including a direction control 112, a powertrain control 114 and brake control 116 [col 6, lines 15-17]; current intended actions (e.g., stop, merge, follow, etc.) [col 18, lines 54-55]; examiner notes that the system of Gate would inherently perform all the actions claimed as they are normal controls required for a vehicle to drive on a road with traffic.).
Regarding claim 4:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the second set of parameters comprises input from a teleoperator (With teleoperations, a remote system or operator operation may be placed in communication with an autonomous vehicle to assist with resolving any such events [col 1, lines 54-57]).
Regarding claim 5:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 4, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the input from the teleoperator comprises at least one of an alteration or modification to the planned trajectory defined by the first parameters (the modification of an element represented in mapping data may include modifying a location of an element and/or modifying data describing that element. In the context of the examples presented above for example, mapping data modifications may modify elements representing lanes or pathways to effectively change a status of at least a portion of a roadway to mark those lanes or pathways as open or closed and/or modify a speed limit associated with those lanes or pathways, such that when an autonomy component of an autonomous vehicle determines a path or trajectory for the vehicle, the modified elements will be used in that determination [col 21, lines 45-56]) or an authorization of some or all of the planned trajectory (examiner is interpreting this limitation in the alternative.).
Regarding claim 7:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
prior to executing the trajectory defined by the third signal (fig. 4 showing validation step 266 before control step 274), determining whether it is safe to implement the trajectory defined by the third signal (the vehicle may validate those commands to ensure that the commands may be implemented without violating any constraints placed on the vehicle for performance and/or safety reasons [col 17, lines 11-15]), wherein executing the trajectory defined by the third signal occurs only after determining that it is safe to execute the trajectory defined by the third signal (block 268 may determine whether the operator input was validated. If not, control passes to block 270 to reject the operator input and notify the operator… Returning to block 268, if the operator input has been validated, control passes to block 274 to execute the operator input [col 17, lines 53-62]).
Regarding claim 8:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising computer- readable instructions executable by a processor to perform or control performance of the method of claim 1 (while subsystems 152-160 are illustrated as being separate from processors 122 and memory 124, it will be appreciated that in some implementations, some or all of the functionality of a subsystem 152-160 may be implemented with program code instructions 126 resident in one or more memories 124 and executed by one or more processors 122, and that these subsystems 152-160 may in some instances be implemented using the same processors and/or memory [col 8, lines 42-50]).
Regarding claim 9:
Gate teaches:
A method to control an autonomous vehicle (a method may include, in an autonomous vehicle operating in an environment, communicating context data collected by the autonomous vehicle from the environment in which the autonomous vehicle operates to a teleoperations system in communication with and remote from the autonomous vehicle to provide situational awareness to the teleoperations system, in the autonomous vehicle, receiving path data from the teleoperations system generated in response to virtual path suggestion input defining a virtual path of travel, and in the autonomous vehicle and in response to the path data, generating a path for the autonomous vehicle that causes the autonomous vehicle to follow the virtual path of travel defined by the path data [col 2, lines 35-48]) comprising:
receiving autonomous input for an autonomous vehicle, the autonomous input comprising one or both of a planned trajectory or a planned behavior (Direction control 112 may include one or more actuators and/or sensors for controlling and receiving feedback from the direction or steering components to enable the vehicle to follow a desired trajectory [col 6, lines 51-54]);
receiving teleoperator input comprising one or both of a trajectory adjustment or a behavior authorization (receiving a map alteration command from the teleoperations system generated in response to the context data, modifying one or more elements in the mapping data used by the autonomous vehicle in response to the map alteration command, and controlling the autonomous vehicle using the mapping data subsequent to modifying the one or more elements such that a path of the autonomous vehicle is determined based at least in part on the modified one or more elements [col 3, lines 15-23]);
outputting a trajectory signal (A teleoperations system may also be used in some implementations to modify mapping data used by an autonomous vehicle and thereby enable the autonomous vehicle to proceed with planning a path or trajectory based upon the updated mapping data [col 20, lines 43-47]) that depends on both the autonomous input and the teleoperator input, the trajectory signal comprising one or both of an updated planned trajectory or an authorized planned behavior (modification of an element represented in mapping data may include modifying a location of an element and/or modifying data describing that element. In the context of the examples presented above for example, mapping data modifications may modify elements representing lanes or pathways to effectively change a status of at least a portion of a roadway to mark those lanes or pathways as open or closed and/or modify a speed limit associated with those lanes or pathways, such that when an autonomy component of an autonomous vehicle determines a path or trajectory for the vehicle, the modified elements will be used in that determination [col 21, lines 46-56]),
determining trajectory components to implement the updated planned trajectory or the authorized planned behavior (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]): and
executing the trajectory components at a drive by wire system of the autonomous vehicle (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]).
outputting the third signal (block 406 generates a map alteration command and communicates the command to the vehicle, which is received in block 408. In some implementations, the map alteration command may include modified mapping data or instructions for modifying the mapping data stored in the autonomous vehicle, while in other implementations the modification of the mapping data stored by the autonomous vehicle may be performed by the autonomous vehicle itself based upon receipt of the command [col 24, lines 37-45]);
Regarding claim 10:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 9, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
determining whether it is safe for the autonomous vehicle to implement one or both of the updated planned trajectory or the authorized planned behavior (the vehicle may validate those commands to ensure that the commands may be implemented without violating any constraints placed on the vehicle for performance and/or safety reasons [col 17, lines 11-15]); and
executing at the autonomous vehicle one or both of the updated planned trajectory or the authorized planned behavior only after determining that it is safe to do so (block 268 may determine whether the operator input was validated. If not, control passes to block 270 to reject the operator input and notify the operator… Returning to block 268, if the operator input has been validated, control passes to block 274 to execute the operator input [col 17, lines 53-62]).
Regarding claim 11:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 9, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the autonomous input comprises the planned behavior and the planned behavior is automatically triggered based on contextual information (a Relative Atlas Subsystem (RAS) 160 may be provided in the illustrated implementations to describe the elements within an environment and the relationships therebetween. RAS 160 may be accessed by each of the localization, planning and perception subsystems 152-156 to obtain various information about the environment for use in performing their respective functions. RAS 160 may be used to provide mapping data to the autonomous vehicle control system, which may be used for various purposes in an autonomous vehicle, including for localization, planning, and perception, among other purposes. Mapping data may be used, for example, to lay out or place elements within a particular geographical area, including, for example, elements that represent real world objects such as roadways, boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), buildings, traffic devices (e.g., traffic signs, lights, etc.), as well as elements that are more logical or virtual in nature, e.g., elements that represent valid pathways a vehicle may take within an environment (referred to hereinafter as “gates”), “virtual” boundaries such as lane markings, or elements that represent logical collections or sets of other elements. [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]).
Regarding claim 12:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 11, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the contextual information includes at least one of a geographic location (a particular geographical area, including, for example, elements that represent real world objects such as roadways, boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), buildings, traffic devices (e.g., traffic signs, lights, etc.) [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]), a lane location (boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]), a hotspot type, a time of day, a season, weather conditions, or a current teleoperator for the autonomous vehicle (With teleoperations, a remote system or operator operation may be placed in communication with an autonomous vehicle to assist with resolving any such events [col 1, lines 54-57]).
Regarding claim 13:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 9, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the autonomous input comprises the planned behavior, the planned behavior is obtained from a library of predefined behaviors, and the predefined behaviors are populated in the library over time based on prior authorizations of the predefined behaviors by a plurality of teleoperators (block 404 may propagate the lane closure to other vehicles in a fleet of vehicles. By doing so, the mapping data of other vehicles may be modified in a similar manner to the autonomous vehicle currently interacting with the teleoperations system such that when such other autonomous vehicles approach the same geographic location, they will determine appropriate paths or trajectories based on this modified data and be able to navigate through the area without teleoperations assistance [col 24, lines 19-28]).
Regarding claim 14:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 9, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the planned behavior includes at least one of throttle control, brake control, steering control to maintain lane-keeping, distance control to maintain distance between the autonomous vehicle and other vehicles, overtaking other vehicles on the left, collision avoidance, or merging (a control system 110 including a direction control 112, a powertrain control 114 and brake control 116 [col 6, lines 15-17]; current intended actions (e.g., stop, merge, follow, etc.) [col 18, lines 54-55]; examiner notes that the system of Gate would inherently perform all the actions claimed as they are normal controls required for a vehicle to drive on a road with traffic.).
Regarding claim 16:
Gate teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising computer-readable instructions executable by a processor to perform or control performance of operations (while subsystems 152-160 are illustrated as being separate from processors 122 and memory 124, it will be appreciated that in some implementations, some or all of the functionality of a subsystem 152-160 may be implemented with program code instructions 126 resident in one or more memories 124 and executed by one or more processors 122, and that these subsystems 152-160 may in some instances be implemented using the same processors and/or memory [col 8, lines 42-50]) comprising:
receiving autonomous input for an autonomous vehicle, the autonomous input comprising one or both of a planned trajectory or a planned behavior (Direction control 112 may include one or more actuators and/or sensors for controlling and receiving feedback from the direction or steering components to enable the vehicle to follow a desired trajectory [col 6, lines 51-54]);
receiving teleoperator input comprising one or both of a trajectory adjustment or a behavior authorization (receiving a map alteration command from the teleoperations system generated in response to the context data, modifying one or more elements in the mapping data used by the autonomous vehicle in response to the map alteration command, and controlling the autonomous vehicle using the mapping data subsequent to modifying the one or more elements such that a path of the autonomous vehicle is determined based at least in part on the modified one or more elements [col 3, lines 15-23]);
outputting a trajectory signal (block 406 generates a map alteration command and communicates the command to the vehicle, which is received in block 408. In some implementations, the map alteration command may include modified mapping data or instructions for modifying the mapping data stored in the autonomous vehicle, while in other implementations the modification of the mapping data stored by the autonomous vehicle may be performed by the autonomous vehicle itself based upon receipt of the command [col 24, lines 37-45]) that depends on both the autonomous input and the teleoperator input, the trajectory signal comprising one or both of an updated planned trajectory or an authorized planned behavior (modification of an element represented in mapping data may include modifying a location of an element and/or modifying data describing that element. In the context of the examples presented above for example, mapping data modifications may modify elements representing lanes or pathways to effectively change a status of at least a portion of a roadway to mark those lanes or pathways as open or closed and/or modify a speed limit associated with those lanes or pathways, such that when an autonomy component of an autonomous vehicle determines a path or trajectory for the vehicle, the modified elements will be used in that determination [col 21, lines 46-56]),
determining trajectory components to implement the trajectory signal (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]); and
executing the trajectory components at a drive by wire system of the autonomous vehicle (in block 410 the autonomous vehicle generates and executes a path based upon the closed lane represented in the modified mapping data. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 8, the autonomous vehicle may determine a path 382 that changes lanes based on the lane closure. Thus, rather than having a teleoperations system operator specify an actual path for the autonomous vehicle to follow, the fact that the lane is marked as closed in the modified mapping data enables the autonomous vehicle to choose an appropriate path that still complies with all of the mapping and perception constraints under which the vehicle operates [col 24, lines 46-56]).
Regarding claim 17:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 16, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
determining whether it is safe for the autonomous vehicle to implement one or both of the updated planned trajectory or the authorized planned behavior (the vehicle may validate those commands to ensure that the commands may be implemented without violating any constraints placed on the vehicle for performance and/or safety reasons [col 17, lines 11-15]); and
executing at the autonomous vehicle one or both of the updated planned trajectory or the authorized planned behavior only after determining that it is safe to do so (block 268 may determine whether the operator input was validated. If not, control passes to block 270 to reject the operator input and notify the operator… Returning to block 268, if the operator input has been validated, control passes to block 274 to execute the operator input [col 17, lines 53-62]).
Regarding claim 18:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 16, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the autonomous input comprises the planned behavior and the planned behavior is automatically triggered based on contextual information (a Relative Atlas Subsystem (RAS) 160 may be provided in the illustrated implementations to describe the elements within an environment and the relationships therebetween. RAS 160 may be accessed by each of the localization, planning and perception subsystems 152-156 to obtain various information about the environment for use in performing their respective functions. RAS 160 may be used to provide mapping data to the autonomous vehicle control system, which may be used for various purposes in an autonomous vehicle, including for localization, planning, and perception, among other purposes. Mapping data may be used, for example, to lay out or place elements within a particular geographical area, including, for example, elements that represent real world objects such as roadways, boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), buildings, traffic devices (e.g., traffic signs, lights, etc.), as well as elements that are more logical or virtual in nature, e.g., elements that represent valid pathways a vehicle may take within an environment (referred to hereinafter as “gates”), “virtual” boundaries such as lane markings, or elements that represent logical collections or sets of other elements. [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]).
Regarding claim 19:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 18, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the contextual information includes at least one of a geographic location (a particular geographical area, including, for example, elements that represent real world objects such as roadways, boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), buildings, traffic devices (e.g., traffic signs, lights, etc.) [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]), a lane location (boundaries (e.g., barriers, lane dividers, medians, etc.), [col 7, lines 59 – col 8, line 13]), a hotspot type, a time of day, a season, weather conditions, or a current teleoperator for the autonomous vehicle (With teleoperations, a remote system or operator operation may be placed in communication with an autonomous vehicle to assist with resolving any such events [col 1, lines 54-57]).
Regarding claim 20:
Gate teaches all the limitations of claim 16, upon which this claim is dependent.
Gate further teaches:
wherein the autonomous input comprises the planned behavior, the planned behavior is obtained from a library of predefined behaviors, and the predefined behaviors are populated in the library over time based on prior authorizations of the predefined behaviors by a plurality of teleoperators (block 404 may propagate the lane closure to other vehicles in a fleet of vehicles. By doing so, the mapping data of other vehicles may be modified in a similar manner to the autonomous vehicle currently interacting with the teleoperations system such that when such other autonomous vehicles approach the same geographic location, they will determine appropriate paths or trajectories based on this modified data and be able to navigate through the area without teleoperations assistance [col 24, lines 19-28]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kaiser (US 11,345,360) discloses Localization error handling using output is described. A computing system associated with a vehicle can receive sensor data from a sensor associated with vehicle. The computing system can determine, based at least partly on the sensor data, a first instruction for controlling the vehicle during a first period of time and a difference in pose information associated with a pose of the vehicle. Based at least partly on determining the difference, the computing system can retrieve a second instruction for controlling the vehicle during a second period of time prior to the first period of time and, based at least partly on comparing the first instruction and the second instruction, the computing system can determine whether the vehicle is to follow the first instruction or perform an alternate operation.
Kentley (US 10,807,591) discloses Systems and processes for controlling a autonomous vehicle when the autonomous vehicle detects a disaster may include receiving a sensor signal from a sensor of a autonomous vehicle and determining that the sensor signal corresponds to a disaster definition accessible to the autonomous vehicle. The systems and processes may further include receiving a corroboration of the detected disaster and altering a drive mode of the autonomous vehicle or receiving an indication that the detected disaster was a false positive and returning to a nominal drive mode of the autonomous vehicle.
Levinson (US 9,507,346) discloses autonomous vehicles and associated mechanical, electrical and electronic hardware, computer software and systems, and wired and wireless network communications to provide an autonomous vehicle fleet as a service. More specifically, systems, devices, and methods are configured to initiate modification of trajectories to influence navigation of autonomous vehicles. In particular, a method may include receiving a teleoperation message via a communication link from an autonomous vehicle, detecting data from the teleoperation message specifying an event associated with the autonomous vehicle, identifying one or more courses of action to perform responsive to detecting the data specifying the event, and generating visualization data to present information associated with the event to a display of a teleoperator computing device.
Moser (US 2024/0036566) discloses controlling a vehicle by teleoperations based on map creation. The method may include: receiving, at the autonomous vehicle, a teleoperation input from a teleoperation system through a communication link, wherein the teleoperation input comprises a modification to at least a portion of an existing trajectory of the autonomous vehicle; generating an updated map data based on the received teleoperation input from the teleoperation system, wherein the updated map data comprises the modification to the least the portion of the existing trajectory; determining a modified trajectory or a new trajectory for the autonomous vehicle based at least in part on the updated map data; and controlling the autonomous vehicle according to the modified trajectory or the new trajectory.
Houshmand (US 2022/0194419) discloses A teleoperations system that collaboratively works with an autonomous vehicle guidance system to generate a path for controlling the autonomous vehicle may comprise generating one or more trajectories at the teleoperations system based at least in part on environment data received from the autonomous vehicle and presenting the one or more trajectories to a teleoperator (e.g., a human user, machine-learned model, or artificial intelligence component). A selection of one of the trajectories may be received at the teleoperations system and transmitted to the autonomous vehicle. The one or more trajectories may be generated at the teleoperations system and/or received from the autonomous vehicle. Regardless, the autonomous vehicle may generate a control trajectory based on the trajectory received from teleoperations, instead of merely implementing the trajectory from the teleoperations system.
Liu (US 2022/0165100) discloses a determination is made that intervention in an operation of one or more autonomous driving capabilities of a vehicle is appropriate. Based on the determination, a person is enabled to provide information for an intervention. The intervention is caused in the operation of the one or more autonomous driving capabilities of the vehicle.
Magzimof (US 2021/0078595) discloses A remote support system facilitates assignment of vehicles to remote support agents for providing teleoperation or other remote support services. The remote support system may generate assignments based on a mapping function that optimizes various parameters based on sensed data associated with the vehicle, a requested service mode of the vehicle, or other factors. In some situations, the remote support server assigns a redundant set of remote support agents to a vehicle that provide similar command streams. The vehicle selects between the command streams to minimize latency or another performance parameter. Alternatively, the remote support server assigns multiple diverse remote support agents to a vehicle that generate diverse command streams. A proxy agent then generates a consensus command stream for providing to the vehicle.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Scott R Jagolinzer whose telephone number is (571)272-4180. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8AM - 4PM Eastern.
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.
Scott R. Jagolinzer
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/S.R.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665