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 .
The official correspondence below is an after non-final.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 11, 15, 20 have been amended.
No claims have been cancelled.
No new claims have been introduced.
Amendments received 03-12-2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03-12-2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner Note
The removal of prior art, in all instances, is not meant to imply that the amendments overcame the prior art in all instances, but were removed due to the application of new art and overlapping/duplicative teachings.
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) 1-8, 10-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rink (DE 102014213171 A1) in view of Kawakami (US 20210237770 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, Rink discloses, one or more computer processors (Rink: [Ln. 514-521] Basically, arithmetic units or other electrical or electronic components or elements of the system described may be embodied, for example, by means of a microprocessor, a microcontroller, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic controller (SPSS) or other hardwired or freely programmable components. By way of example, such arithmetic units or other electronic components or elements may comprise processor means and memory means, wherein the memory means stores program code in the execution of which the processor means execute a specific method and / or sequence of instructions; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); and one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions (Rink: [Ln. 515-521] by means of a microprocessor, a microcontroller, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic controller (SPSS) or other hardwired or freely programmable components. By way of example, such arithmetic units or other electronic components or elements may comprise processor means and memory means, wherein the memory means stores program code in the execution of which the processor means execute a specific method and / or sequence of instructions) which, when executed by the one or more computer processors, cause performance of operations comprising: identifying a first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049] first electrical system ( 102 ) and a second electrical system ( 202 ); [Ln. 927-931] IDC = integrated drive control SDC = safety domain control BDC = backup drive control; [Ln. 960-962] the "seeing path" assumes the following functions if the "listening path" fails: - the web guide over the sensors and with the card data already handed over to the IDC) to generate control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform a particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning by means of the information transmitted by components of the second set of components of the first set for a specific period of time, preferably between 5 s and 10 s. This may be a sufficient time to perform a handover of the vehicle control to a driver, wherein the vehicle is sufficiently reliably controlled until the handover to avoid an accident. Alternatively or additionally, it may be provided to transfer the vehicle to a specific state, such as stopping on a hard shoulder; [Ln. 408-415] at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049] first electrical system ( 102 ) and a second electrical system ( 202 ); [Ln. 927-931] IDC = integrated drive control SDC = safety domain control BDC = backup drive control; [Ln. 960-962] the "seeing path" assumes the following functions if the "listening path" fails: - the web guide over the sensors and with the card data already handed over to the IDC) are associated with a first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: see above: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); identifying a second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049] first electrical system ( 102 ) and a second electrical system ( 202 ); [Ln. 927-931] IDC = integrated drive control SDC = safety domain control BDC = backup drive control; [Ln. 960-962] the "seeing path" assumes the following functions if the "listening path" fails: - the web guide over the sensors and with the card data already handed over to the IDC) to generate the control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform the same particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049] first electrical system ( 102 ) and a second electrical system ( 202 ); [Ln. 927-931] IDC = integrated drive control SDC = safety domain control BDC = backup drive control; [Ln. 960-962] the "seeing path" assumes the following functions if the "listening path" fails: - the web guide over the sensors and with the card data already handed over to the IDC) are associated with a second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); selecting the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 399-406] Particularly preferably, at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning by means of the information transmitted by components of the second set of components of the first set for a specific period of time, preferably between 5 s and 10 s. This may be a sufficient time to perform a handover of the vehicle control to a driver, wherein the vehicle is sufficiently reliably controlled until the handover to avoid an accident. Alternatively or additionally, it may be provided to transfer the vehicle to a specific state, such as stopping on a hard shoulder; [Ln. 408-415] Preferably, at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on a determination that an identified set of autonomous driving hardware of the autonomous vehicle satisfies the first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 408-415] Preferably, at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken; [Ln. 456-467] The system preferably has one or more components in order to calculate a vehicle position in two ways, namely firstly based on vehicle dynamics data and satellite navigation data, and secondly based at least on camera data and particularly preferably also on map data. For an advantageous redundancy is achieved, which can be used in case of failure of a certain part of the system to other parts in order to obtain the necessary for a safe or at least limited driving with autonomous vehicle management functionality. In addition, a tolerance against common cause errors is achieved, i. it is very unlikely that the same error will interfere with both types of computation in the same way. Particularly preferred is a component for calculating the vehicle position based on camera data and possibly also map data for the first set of components. More preferably, a component for calculating the vehicle position based on vehicle dynamics data and satellite navigation belongs to the second set of components) and could not satisfy the second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [0145-0147] the components of the second set are adapted to perform an at least limited and/or time-limited autonomous vehicle guidance even in case of failure of the components of the first set; [0399-0401] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning; [0410-0412] at least one component of the second set is configured in the 410 event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate 411 autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning); obtaining, using the first group of control components, a reference trajectory (Rink: [Ln. 382-388] With a position transferred from a component of the second path, for example a device for accurate tracking positioning, a simple localization in at least one component of the first set can be continuously calibrated, which enables, for example, a track-accurate positioning in trajectory planning. Also, a traversed actual trajectory can be determined by self-localization and from this an optimization of the actuator control can be carried out by the motion control. Thus, a closed control loop of Aktoransteuerung and resulting position change can be formed, which allows a particularly precise driving; [Ln. 408-415] Preferably, at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken), a set of lateral constraints, and a set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 101-106] parking assistants for autonomous maneuvering in a parking space, congestion assistants for lane keeping and distance at low speeds or Abstandstempomate for automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance to a vehicle in front. Such systems can significantly relieve the driver in certain situations by taking him at least part of the vehicle guidance. Thus, they contribute to increased safety and also to increased ride comfort; [Ln. 169-174] A partially autonomous vehicle guidance can be understood, for example, as meaning that the vehicle undertakes individual driving tasks such as holding the speed, keeping the distance to the vehicle in front or keeping the lane itself, but other driving tasks are simultaneously taken over by the driver. Autonomous driver assistance can also be understood as autonomous assistance functions such as construction site assistant, highway driving or traffic jam assist; [Ln. 355-363] for example dynamically changing objects which may be on a trajectory, such as left-over vehicles, construction sites, special-purpose vehicles and / or traffic jams, traffic signal information, vehicle dynamics data of other vehicles, in particular advance vehicles approaching or approaching, with which stable convoy travel can be made possible, information about lane change intentions of other vehicles, in particular of preceding, approaching or moving vehicles, which affect their own traffic lane, - Vehicle dynamics data, for example - yaw rate and / or 3D yaw rate, - acceleration and / or 3D acceleration, - steering angle, - wheel speed, - speed over ground, - slip angle); determining, using the first group of control components, the control commands to perform the particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 551-558] The system 10 is designed to autonomously control a vehicle in defined situations. It should be mentioned in particular that the system 10 can realize a stable column ride on a highway, so that the vehicle joins the flow of traffic and normally no intervention by the driver are necessary. In particular, steering angle, engine power and braking effect are by the system 10 autonomously controlled so that the direction of travel, curve radii, speed, acceleration and deceleration are set automatically. If all the components of the system listed above 10 are functioning normally, ie are in operation, the system reaches 10 its maximum functionality), wherein the control commands comprise a set of steering commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147] it is provided that Each of the components is associated with a first set of components or a second set of components, - Wherein the components of the first set are adapted to perform an at least limited and / or time-limited autonomous vehicle guidance even in case of failure of the components of the second set, and - Wherein the components of the second set are adapted to perform an at least limited and / or time-limited autonomous vehicle guidance even in case of failure of the components of the first set; [Ln. 399-406] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning by means of the information transmitted by components of the second set of components of the first set for a specific period of time, preferably between 5 s and 10 s. This may be a sufficient time to perform a handover of the vehicle control to a driver, wherein the vehicle is sufficiently reliably controlled until the handover to avoid an accident. Alternatively or additionally, it may be provided to transfer the vehicle to a specific state, such as stopping on a hard shoulder; [Ln. 408-415] at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) and a set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on the reference trajectory (Rink: ), the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), and the set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); and causing the autonomous vehicle to navigate according to the set of steering commands and the set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]).
The examiner respectfully submits, Rink discloses “lateral constraints” (see at least Ln. 171, lane keeping; Ln. 333, parking of the vehicle in a space; Ln. 362-363, steer angle and slip).
However, in the alternative, and in the same field of endeavor, Kawakami discloses, the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [0064] A speed of the subject vehicle (vehicle speed) can also be used as a condition of the limit determination part 23 correcting the control amount threshold value ... a large movement in the lateral direction is caused even by a small steering torque due to an unintended steering, thus the correction is performed to set the control amount threshold value (upper limit value) to small ... when the vehicle travels at a low speed, the correction may be performed to set the control amount threshold value (upper limit value) to large; [0072] It is also considered that the control amount threshold value is calculated in consideration of characteristics of the vehicle, force applied to the vehicle, a movement amount of the vehicle in the lateral direction), for the benefit of an expansion of functionality and safety in automatic driving.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Rink to include variable lateral movement thresholds taught by Kawakami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to expand the functionality and safety in automatic driving.
REGARDING CLAIM 2, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, determining a lateral position of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 268-274] Antenna interface, in particular for vehicle-to-X communication (C2X communication), Device for accurate positioning and / or localization, in particular by means of satellite navigation, odometry and / or landmark-based positioning, Vehicle-to-X communication means (C2X communication means), Further device for determining input parameters for actuators (backup motion control), - Other actuators (backup actuators), in particular further steering (backup steering)) based on a plurality of steering factors (Rink: [Ln. 326-328] This makes it possible to acquire driving dynamics data, for example for use in a position determination or in a position-accurate positioning; [Ln. 353-363] Vehicle position in a global reference system, in particular WGS 84, Accurate positioning, for example for use in a digital map, Information from vehicle-to-X communication, for example dynamically changing objects which may be on a trajectory, such as left-over vehicles, construction sites, special-purpose vehicles and / or traffic jams, traffic signal information, vehicle dynamics data of other vehicles, in particular advance vehicles approaching or approaching, with which stable convoy travel can be made possible, information about lane change intentions of other vehicles, in particular of preceding, approaching or moving vehicles, which affect their own traffic lane, - Vehicle dynamics data, for example - yaw rate and / or 3D yaw rate, - acceleration and / or 3D acceleration, - steering angle, - wheel speed, - speed over ground, - slip angle; [Ln. 692-696] The driving dynamics sensors 270 have a number of speed sensors, a steering angle sensor, a steering wheel angle sensor and an acceleration sensor. Thus, the driving state of the vehicle can be comprehensively detected and mapped into vehicle dynamics data, this vehicle dynamics data in particular of the device 220 be supplied for accurate tracking positioning; [Ln. 826-827] The driving dynamics data (eg up to 3D yaw rate, 3D acceleration, steering angle, wheel speed, speed over ground, slip angle, etc.)); and determining the set of steering commands based at least in part on the determined lateral position of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 102-103] congestion assistants for lane keeping and distance; [Ln. 196-171] A partially autonomous vehicle guidance can be understood, for example, as meaning that the vehicle undertakes individual driving tasks such as holding the speed, keeping the distance to the vehicle in front or keeping the lane itself; [Ln. 437-439] This may alert other vehicles that the vehicle may not behave as if it had fully operational autonomous vehicle guidance. You can then, for example, maintain a greater distance or refrain from changing lanes).
REGARDING CLAIM 3, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 2. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the plurality of steering factors comprise one of more of a distance of the autonomous vehicle to an obstacle, a distance of the autonomous vehicle from the reference trajectory, or a threshold of lateral change (Rink: [Ln. 103-104] automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance; [Ln. 158-159] determination or greater distance from the vehicle in front can be performed).
REGARDING CLAIM 4, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 3. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the threshold of lateral change comprises a maximum allowed rate of turning of the autonomous vehicle (Kawakami: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value; [0035] the steering control amount is changed to a value corresponding to the control amount threshold value. Then, the steering actuator 53 is driven with motor current corresponding to the changed steering control amount (torque amount), and functions as a steering torque of the steering mechanism 54 mechanistically connected to the steering actuator 53 to be used for steering control. Accordingly, dangerous control performed by the vehicle can be prevented).
REGARDING CLAIM 5, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, determining a target speed of the autonomous vehicle over time that satisfies a comfort factor within the set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 103-106] for automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance to a vehicle in front. Such systems can significantly relieve the driver in certain situations by taking him at least part of the vehicle guidance. Thus, they contribute to increased safety and also to increased ride comfort); and determining the set of speed commands based at least in part on the determined target speed of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 103-106] for automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance to a vehicle in front. Such systems can significantly relieve the driver in certain situations by taking him at least part of the vehicle guidance. Thus, they contribute to increased safety and also to increased ride comfort).
REGARDING CLAIM 6, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 5. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the comfort factor comprises an acceleration or deceleration rate within predetermined acceleration or deceleration comfort boundaries (Rink: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value; [0032] a target braking amount and a target acceleration amount are also transmitted from the automatic driving ECU 20 to the brake control device 60 and the accelerator control device 70. Each of the brake control device 60 and the accelerator control device 70 performs the actuator control to achieve the automatic driving. The target steering angle, the target braking amount, and the target acceleration amount being output from the automatic driving ECU 20 become a control target value for achieving the automatic driving (examiner: Please note that steering, a change of direction, is an acceleration. Thus, steering per se is a form of acceleration)).
REGARDING CLAIM 7, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, causing the autonomous vehicle to navigate according to the set of steering commands (Kawakami: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value) and the set of speed commands is based on a determination that the set of steering commands (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]) and the set of speed commands (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]) satisfy a safety factor (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]), wherein the safety factor comprises an estimated likelihood of the set of steering commands and the set of speed commands resulting in a collision or dangerous/illegal maneuver being less than a threshold (Kawakami: [0051] curved road is added to the threshold value, and L1.sub.High+L2.sub.High is set as the upper limit value, and L2.sub.Low is set as the lower limit value to prevent a collision with a wall surface without performing the steering control; [0060-0064]).
Kawakami does not explicitly recite the terminology "safety factor". However, Kawakami discloses threshold, ranges and not exceeding limits. Which, the examiner respectfully submits, is a parallel teaching.
REGARDING CLAIM 8, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the reference trajectory comprises a path with respect to time received from a planning module of the autonomous vehicle (Kawakami: [0051] The value of L2.sub.Low is determined from the steering force needed to maintain the handle in conformity to the curvature of the curve at the time of traveling along the curved road).
REGARDING CLAIM 10, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the set of speed constraints comprise one or more of roadway speed limits, physical acceleration or deceleration limits of the autonomous vehicle, or predetermined acceleration or deceleration comfort boundaries (Rink: [Ln. 284-287] Secondly, a communication between a vehicle and infrastructure, for example, information about breakdowns can be sent from the vehicle and information about the infrastructure Traffic rules, speed limits, traffic conditions or diversions can be received; [Ln. 681-684] the communication module receives 250 Ongoing signals from other vehicles and infrastructure facilities, for example, positions, speeds and events of other vehicles, the traffic situation or traffic rules such as speed limits. This information will be the other components of the system 10 made accessible).
In considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom. Thus, receiving speed limits for a roadway implies or suggests local speed limits are a vehicle operation constraint.
REGARDING CLAIM 11, Rink discloses, identifying a first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]); [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) to generate control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform a particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) are associated with a first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: see above: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); identifying a second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) to generate the control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform the same particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) are associated with a second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); selecting the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on a determination that an identified set of autonomous driving hardware of the autonomous vehicle satisfies the first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 408-415]; [Ln. 456-467]) and could not satisfy the second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [0145-0147]; [0399-0401]; [0410-0412]); obtaining, using the first group of control components, a reference trajectory (Rink: [Ln. 382-388]; [Ln. 408-415]), a set of lateral constraints, and a set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 101-106]; [Ln. 169-174]; [Ln. 355-363]); determining, using the first group of control components, the control commands to perform the particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 551-558]), wherein the control commands comprise a set of steering commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) and a set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on the reference trajectory (Rink: ), the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), and the set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); and causing the autonomous vehicle to navigate according to the set of steering commands and the set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]).
The examiner respectfully submits, Rink discloses “lateral constraints” (see at least Ln. 171, lane keeping; Ln. 333, parking of the vehicle in a space; Ln. 362-363, steer angle and slip).
However, in the alternative, and in the same field of endeavor, Kawakami discloses, the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [0064]; [0072]), for the benefit of an expansion of functionality and safety in automatic driving.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Rink to include variable lateral movement thresholds taught by Kawakami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to expand the functionality and safety in automatic driving.
REGARDING CLAIM 12, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 11. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, determining a lateral position of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 268-274] Antenna interface, in particular for vehicle-to-X communication (C2X communication), Device for accurate positioning and / or localization, in particular by means of satellite navigation, odometry and / or landmark-based positioning, Vehicle-to-X communication means (C2X communication means), Further device for determining input parameters for actuators (backup motion control), - Other actuators (backup actuators), in particular further steering (backup steering)) based on a plurality of steering factors (Rink: [Ln. 326-328] This makes it possible to acquire driving dynamics data, for example for use in a position determination or in a position-accurate positioning; [Ln. 353-363] Vehicle position in a global reference system, in particular WGS 84, Accurate positioning, for example for use in a digital map, Information from vehicle-to-X communication, for example dynamically changing objects which may be on a trajectory, such as left-over vehicles, construction sites, special-purpose vehicles and / or traffic jams, traffic signal information, vehicle dynamics data of other vehicles, in particular advance vehicles approaching or approaching, with which stable convoy travel can be made possible, information about lane change intentions of other vehicles, in particular of preceding, approaching or moving vehicles, which affect their own traffic lane, - Vehicle dynamics data, for example - yaw rate and / or 3D yaw rate, - acceleration and / or 3D acceleration, - steering angle, - wheel speed, - speed over ground, - slip angle; [Ln. 692-696] The driving dynamics sensors 270 have a number of speed sensors, a steering angle sensor, a steering wheel angle sensor and an acceleration sensor. Thus, the driving state of the vehicle can be comprehensively detected and mapped into vehicle dynamics data, this vehicle dynamics data in particular of the device 220 be supplied for accurate tracking positioning; [Ln. 826-827] The driving dynamics data (eg up to 3D yaw rate, 3D acceleration, steering angle, wheel speed, speed over ground, slip angle, etc.)); and determining the set of steering commands based at least in part on the determined lateral position of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 102-103] congestion assistants for lane keeping and distance; [Ln. 196-171] A partially autonomous vehicle guidance can be understood, for example, as meaning that the vehicle undertakes individual driving tasks such as holding the speed, keeping the distance to the vehicle in front or keeping the lane itself; [Ln. 437-439] This may alert other vehicles that the vehicle may not behave as if it had fully operational autonomous vehicle guidance. You can then, for example, maintain a greater distance or refrain from changing lanes).
REGARDING CLAIM 13, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 12. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the plurality of steering factors comprise one of more of a distance of the autonomous vehicle to an obstacle, a distance of the autonomous vehicle from the reference trajectory, or a threshold of lateral change (Rink: [Ln. 103-104] automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance; [Ln. 158-159] determination or greater distance from the vehicle in front can be performed).
REGARDING CLAIM 14, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 13. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the threshold of lateral change comprises a maximum allowed rate of turning of the autonomous vehicle (Kawakami: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value; [0035] the steering control amount is changed to a value corresponding to the control amount threshold value. Then, the steering actuator 53 is driven with motor current corresponding to the changed steering control amount (torque amount), and functions as a steering torque of the steering mechanism 54 mechanistically connected to the steering actuator 53 to be used for steering control. Accordingly, dangerous control performed by the vehicle can be prevented).
REGARDING CLAIM 15, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 11. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, determining a target speed of the autonomous vehicle over time that satisfies a comfort factor within the set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 103-106] for automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance to a vehicle in front. Such systems can significantly relieve the driver in certain situations by taking him at least part of the vehicle guidance. Thus, they contribute to increased safety and also to increased ride comfort); and determining the set of speed commands based at least in part on the determined target speed of the autonomous vehicle over time (Rink: [Ln. 103-106] for automatically maintaining a speed-dependent distance to a vehicle in front. Such systems can significantly relieve the driver in certain situations by taking him at least part of the vehicle guidance. Thus, they contribute to increased safety and also to increased ride comfort).
REGARDING CLAIM 16, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 15. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the comfort factor comprises an acceleration or deceleration rate within predetermined acceleration or deceleration comfort boundaries (Kawakami: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value; [0032] a target braking amount and a target acceleration amount are also transmitted from the automatic driving ECU 20 to the brake control device 60 and the accelerator control device 70. Each of the brake control device 60 and the accelerator control device 70 performs the actuator control to achieve the automatic driving. The target steering angle, the target braking amount, and the target acceleration amount being output from the automatic driving ECU 20 become a control target value for achieving the automatic driving (examiner: Please note that steering, a change of direction, is an acceleration. Thus, steering per se is a form of acceleration)).
REGARDING CLAIM 17, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 11. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, causing the autonomous vehicle to navigate according to the set of steering commands (Kawakami: [ABS] the steering control device changes the steering control amount not to exceed the control amount threshold value) and the set of speed commands is based on a determination that the set of steering commands (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]) and the set of speed commands (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]) satisfy a safety factor (Kawakami: [0039] Next, in Step S102, the limit determination part 23 determines whether there is a change in any of the surrounding state and the control state of the subject vehicle and the subject vehicle speed associated with the change in a threshold value described below. When it is determined that there is a change, the limit determination part 23 selects the control amount threshold value (upper limit value and lower limit value) in Step S103, and the process proceeds with Step S104. The selection method is determined by referring to a table described below. In the meanwhile, when it is determined that there is no change, the control amount threshold value is maintained and a series of operations is finished. [0040] In Step S104, the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103 is corrected in accordance with the surrounding state and the travel speed of the subject vehicle. The correction method is described below. [0041] Next, in Step S105, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the corrected control amount threshold value. The correction in Step S104 is not a necessary process, thus when Step S104 is not provided, the steering limiter 52 is notified of the control amount threshold value selected in Step S103; [0060-0064]), wherein the safety factor comprises an estimated likelihood of the set of steering commands and the set of speed commands resulting in a collision or dangerous/illegal maneuver being less than a threshold (Kawakami: [0051] curved road is added to the threshold value, and L1.sub.High+L2.sub.High is set as the upper limit value, and L2.sub.Low is set as the lower limit value to prevent a collision with a wall surface without performing the steering control; [0060-0064]).
REGARDING CLAIM 19, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 11. Further, Rink, as modified, also discloses, the set of speed constraints comprise one or more of roadway speed limits, physical acceleration or deceleration limits of the autonomous vehicle, or predetermined acceleration or deceleration comfort boundaries (Rink: [Ln. 284-287] Secondly, a communication between a vehicle and infrastructure, for example, information about breakdowns can be sent from the vehicle and information about the infrastructure Traffic rules, speed limits, traffic conditions or diversions can be received; [Ln. 681-684] the communication module receives 250 Ongoing signals from other vehicles and infrastructure facilities, for example, positions, speeds and events of other vehicles, the traffic situation or traffic rules such as speed limits. This information will be the other components of the system 10 made accessible).
REGARDING CLAIM 20, Rink discloses, identifying a first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]); [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) to generate control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform a particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) are associated with a first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: see above: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); identifying a second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) to generate the control commands to cause the autonomous vehicle to perform the same particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), wherein the second group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 1048-1049]; [Ln. 927-931]; [Ln. 960-962]) are associated with a second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); selecting the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on a determination that an identified set of autonomous driving hardware of the autonomous vehicle satisfies the first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 408-415]; [Ln. 456-467]) and could not satisfy the second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [0145-0147]; [0399-0401]; [0410-0412]); obtaining, using the first group of control components, a reference trajectory (Rink: [Ln. 382-388]; [Ln. 408-415]), a set of lateral constraints, and a set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 101-106]; [Ln. 169-174]; [Ln. 355-363]); determining, using the first group of control components, the control commands to perform the particular navigational movement (Rink: [Ln. 551-558]), wherein the control commands comprise a set of steering commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) and a set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]) based on the reference trajectory (Rink: ), the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]), and the set of speed constraints (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]); and causing the autonomous vehicle to navigate according to the set of steering commands and the set of speed commands (Rink: [Ln. 141-147]; [Ln. 399-406]; [Ln. 408-415]; [FIG. 1, 5-7]).
The examiner respectfully submits, Rink discloses “lateral constraints” (see at least Ln. 171, lane keeping; Ln. 333, parking of the vehicle in a space; Ln. 362-363, steer angle and slip).
However, in the alternative, and in the same field of endeavor, Kawakami discloses, the set of lateral constraints (Rink: [0064]; [0072]), for the benefit of an expansion of functionality and safety in automatic driving.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Rink to include variable lateral movement thresholds taught by Kawakami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to expand the functionality and safety in automatic driving.
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rink (DE 102014213171 A1) in view of Kawakami (US 20210237770 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Zhang (US 20200348684 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 9, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Rink, as modified, does not explicitly disclose, the set of lateral constraints comprise maximum distances to left and right sides of the autonomous vehicle configured to enable the autonomous vehicle to safely veer from the reference trajectory at different points in time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses, the set of lateral constraints comprise maximum distances to left and right sides of the autonomous vehicle (Zhang: [0018] A set of path constraints including constraints relating to the threshold lateral jerk, avoidance of one or more static obstacles, and a threshold lateral velocity are received. A cost function associated with a path objective and comprising a first term relating to cumulative lateral distances, a second term relating to cumulative first order lateral rates of change, and a third term relating to cumulative second order lateral rates of change is received. Thereafter, a plurality of planned ADV states are generated as path results with nonlinear optimization, where the path results minimize a value of the cost function while satisfying or meeting the set of path constraints; [0067] path constraints comprising constraints relating to the threshold lateral jerk and avoidance of one or more static obstacles ... a cost function associated with an path objective may be obtained, the cost function comprising a first term relating to cumulative lateral distances, a second term relating to cumulative first order lateral rates of change, and a third term relating to cumulative second order lateral rates of change) configured to enable the autonomous vehicle to safely veer from the reference trajectory at different points in time (Zhang: [0018] a threshold lateral jerk, and static obstacle boundaries with respect to a reference line are received at the path planner … avoidance of one or more static obstacles), for the benefit of affecting the desirability of any given path, including those relating to passenger comfort and safety.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by a modified Rink to include threshold lateral rates and constraints taught by Zhang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to affect the desirability of any given path, including those relating to passenger comfort and safety.
REGARDING CLAIM 18, Rink, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 11. Further, Rink, as modified, does not explicitly disclose, the set of lateral constraints comprise maximum distances to left and right sides of the autonomous vehicle configured to enable the autonomous vehicle to safely veer from the reference trajectory at different points in time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses, the set of lateral constraints comprise maximum distances to left and right sides of the autonomous vehicle (Zhang: [0018] A set of path constraints including constraints relating to the threshold lateral jerk, avoidance of one or more static obstacles, and a threshold lateral velocity are received. A cost function associated with a path objective and comprising a first term relating to cumulative lateral distances, a second term relating to cumulative first order lateral rates of change, and a third term relating to cumulative second order lateral rates of change is received. Thereafter, a plurality of planned ADV states are generated as path results with nonlinear optimization, where the path results minimize a value of the cost function while satisfying or meeting the set of path constraints; [0067] path constraints comprising constraints relating to the threshold lateral jerk and avoidance of one or more static obstacles ... a cost function associated with an path objective may be obtained, the cost function comprising a first term relating to cumulative lateral distances, a second term relating to cumulative first order lateral rates of change, and a third term relating to cumulative second order lateral rates of change) configured to enable the autonomous vehicle to safely veer from the reference trajectory at different points in time (Zhang: [0018] a threshold lateral jerk, and static obstacle boundaries with respect to a reference line are received at the path planner … avoidance of one or more static obstacles), for the benefit of affecting the desirability of any given path, including those relating to passenger comfort and safety.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by a modified Rink to include threshold lateral rates and constraints taught by Zhang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to affect the desirability of any given path, including those relating to passenger comfort and safety.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03-12-2026, beginning on page 9, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
To the examiner’s best understanding, the applicant has contended that the prior art of record fails to disclose, “selecting the first group of control components based on a determination that an identified set of autonomous driving hardware of the autonomous vehicle satisfies the first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements and could not satisfy the second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements”. The examiner respectfully submits, as cited above, Rink (DE 102014213171 A1) discloses, selecting the first group of control components (Rink: [Ln. 399-406] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning by means of the information transmitted by components of the second set of components of the first set for a specific period of time, preferably between 5 s and 10 s. This may be a sufficient time to perform a handover of the vehicle control to a driver, wherein the vehicle is sufficiently reliably controlled until the handover to avoid an accident. Alternatively or additionally, it may be provided to transfer the vehicle to a specific state, such as stopping on a hard shoulder; [Ln. 408-415] at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken) based on a determination that an identified set of autonomous driving hardware of the autonomous vehicle satisfies the first set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [Ln. 399-406] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning by means of the information transmitted by components of the second set of components of the first set for a specific period of time, preferably between 5 s and 10 s. This may be a sufficient time to perform a handover of the vehicle control to a driver, wherein the vehicle is sufficiently reliably controlled until the handover to avoid an accident. Alternatively or additionally, it may be provided to transfer the vehicle to a specific state, such as stopping on a hard shoulder; [Ln. 408-415] at least one component of the first set is configured to continuously transmit trajectory planning to at least one component of the second set when operating both on-board systems, wherein at least one component of the second set is configured in the event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning. Thus, even in the case of a failure on the part of the first set a safe, albeit possibly temporally limited continued operation of the vehicle can be made possible, until a driver has taken control or other measures have been taken; [Ln. 456-467] The system preferably has one or more components in order to calculate a vehicle position in two ways, namely firstly based on vehicle dynamics data and satellite navigation data, and secondly based at least on camera data and particularly preferably also on map data. For an advantageous redundancy is achieved, which can be used in case of failure of a certain part of the system to other parts in order to obtain the necessary for a safe or at least limited driving with autonomous vehicle management functionality. In addition, a tolerance against common cause errors is achieved, i. it is very unlikely that the same error will interfere with both types of computation in the same way. Particularly preferred is a component for calculating the vehicle position based on camera data and possibly also map data for the first set of components. More preferably, a component for calculating the vehicle position based on vehicle dynamics data and satellite navigation belongs to the second set of components) and could not satisfy the second set of autonomous driving hardware capability requirements (Rink: [0145-0147] the components of the second set are adapted to perform an at least limited and/or time-limited autonomous vehicle guidance even in case of failure of the components of the first set; [0399-0401] at least one component of the first set is designed to, in the event of a failure of the second on-board network or at least one component of the second set, carry out trajectory planning; [0410-0412] at least one component of the second set is configured in the 410 event of failure of the first on-board network or components of the first set operate 411 autonomous driving for a certain period of time using this trajectory planning).
The examiner respectfully submits, Rink (DE 102014213171 A1) discloses, selecting a first or second group based on state of hardware and resulting capabilities, and using both groups when they are both operating properly or, in the event first or second group is not functioning properly, selecting the group that is functionally to perform vehicle maneuvering. Because Rink (DE 102014213171 A1) discloses that which is claimed, the examiner respectfully maintains the rejection of the independent claims under 35 USC §103, obviousness.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Nemeth (US 20190196001 A1)
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 AARRON SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, ANGELA ORTIZ can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights