DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-7, 11-18, 20-21, 23-28, and 30 are currently pending.
Claims 1-6, 11-13, 16-17, 20-21, 23, 28, and 30 are currently amended.
Claims 8-10, 22, 29 have been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 and 17 recites the limitation "second indication " in line 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Neither claim 2/17 or claim 1/16 introduces a “first indication” to establish a numerical sequence for the indications. The Examiner is interpreting “an indication” from claim 1 and 16 to be the “first indication”.
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) 1-7, 11, 13-18, 21, 23-24 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler et al. (US 20180189323 A1), and herein after will be referred to as Wheeler, in view of Sakai et al. (US 20100274472 A1), herein after will be referred to as Sakai.
Regarding Claim 1, Wheeler teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (A vehicle computing system that communicates with a map server over a network; [0027] [0036]):
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory, the at least one processor(The computing system including processor and memory; [0095]):
calculate a route to a destination based on a current location of the UE and map data (A route generation module that calculates the vehicle’s optimal path from a source location to a destination; [0043]);
receive, from a server, an indication of updated map data associated with the calculated route (The vehicle computing system queries the HP map system and receives a list of available updated map tiles corresponding to the route; [0084]), wherein the updated map data includes a plurality of packets (Transmitting map data as compressed map tiles over a wire format which structurally and functionally constitutes data packets; [0080-0081]);
assign, based on a set of live parameters, a first set of packets in the plurality of
packets with a first priority and a second set of packets in the plurality of packets with
a second priority (Utilizing localization/location data, as live parameters, to assign a first priority to the immediate map tile (loading it first) and a second priority to subsequent map tiles along the route; [0077] [0085]), and
download the second set of packets in a background setting (Downloading the map tiles asynchronously in the background while computations are occurring; [0083] [0085]).
Wheeler does not explicitly teach the first set of packets is associated with a set of frequently-
used routes and the second set of packets is associated with a set of less frequently-
used routes compared to the first set of packets.
However, Sakai disclose a navigation device that prioritizes map data updates based on the frequency of use and history of those map sections. Sakai teaches determining request actions with high update necessity by selecting map sections based on passage history, specifically the number of times the current position included in the section has been passed through ([0055]). This teaching is equivalent to the claimed limitation because the system prioritizes map data packets by the number of times the current position has travel through the route.
Wheeler and Sakai are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicle navigation systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler to incorporate the teachings of prioritizing map data updates based on the number of times traveled through the route as taught by Sakai based on the motivation to optimizes the network connectivity bandwidth by prefetching and caching map data that is historically most likely to utilize on their routine drives. This provides the benefit of ensuring that map data for the operator’s daily commutes is update to date and available with minimal latency which reduces the overall network transmission and improves the autonomous navigation system.
Regarding Claim 2, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches
update the calculated route based on the downloaded first set of packets or the second set of packets (The system dynamically adjusts and updates the vehicle’s route using the map tiles (packets) that are downloaded; [0043] [0086]); and
output a second indication of the updated calculated route (Outputting the updated route (plan comprising the sequence of actions) to the control module for the vehicle to navigate the route; [0040] [0043]).
Regarding Claim 3, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 2. Wheeler further teaches store, in a memory or a cache, the second indication of the updated calculated route (The route generation module dynamically updates and stores the routes; [0043] [0078]).
Regarding Claim 4, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches transmit, to the server, a second indication of the calculated route and the set of live parameters (The system transmits information describing the planned route along with real-time live parameters like GPS location and IMU motion data to the online map server; [0046] [0051] [0084]),
wherein to receive the indication of the updated map data, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to receive the indication of the updated map data based on the calculated route and the set of live parameters (Downloading relevant map updates using the planned route while continuously applying live vehicle parameters to load upcoming map tiles; [0046] [0050] [0086]).
Regarding Claim 5, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches
receive, from the server, a second indication of the map data (The vehicle computing system receives HD map data from the online HD map system; [0031] [0035]),
wherein to calculate the route, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to calculate the route based on the map data (The vehicle processor calculates and generates a driving route using the HD map data; [0046]).
Regarding Claim 6, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches perform a periodic check with the server to determine whether there is an update for the map data (The vehicle computing system periodically checks the online HD map system; [0055]),
wherein to receive the indication of the updated map data, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to receive the indication of the updated map data based on the periodic check (When the periodic check results in an updated map, the vehicle computing system request and receives the latest update; [0055] [0084]).
Regarding Claim 7, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches the set of live parameters includes a speed of the UE (The vehicle’s parameters are used by the computing system which includes the speed of the vehicle; [0033] [0041]).
Regarding Claim 11, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches estimate the current location of the UE based on the map data and Global Positioning System (GPS) data (The localization estimates and updates the vehicle’s location within the HD map using inputs that include GPS location data; [0046] [0083]).
Regarding Claim 13, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches receive a request to provide a route guidance or an autonomous driving to the destination (The vehicle computing system receives a passenger request for a destination for the autonomous vehicle; [0084] [0086]), wherein to calculate the route, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to calculate the route based on the request (The vehicle computing system determines and calculates routes based on the start and destination inputs; [0086]).
Regarding Claim 14, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches the map data and the updated map data are high-definition (HD) map data (The map data and updated map data utilized by the vehicle computing system are HD map data; [0031-0032]).
Regarding Claim 15, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler further teaches the UE is an autonomous driving vehicle (The vehicle computing system is integrated into an autonomous vehicle; [0031] [0034]).
Regarding Claim 16, Wheeler teaches a method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (A vehicle computing system that communicates with a map server over a network; [0027] [0036]):
calculating a route to a destination based on a current location of the UE and map data (A route generation module that calculates the vehicle’s optimal path from a source location to a destination; [0043]);
receiving, from a server, an indication of updated map data associated with the calculated route (The vehicle computing system queries the HP map system and receives a list of available updated map tiles corresponding to the route; [0084]), wherein the updated map data includes a plurality of packets (Transmitting map data as compressed map tiles over a wire format which structurally and functionally constitutes data packets; [0080-0081]);
assigning, based on a set of live parameters, a first set of packets in the plurality of packets with a first priority and a second set of packets in the plurality of packets with a second priority (Utilizing localization/location data, as live parameters, to assign a first priority to the immediate map tile (loading it first) and a second priority to subsequent map tiles along the route; [0077] [0085]), and
download the second set of packets in a background setting (Downloading the map tiles asynchronously in the background while computations are occurring; [0083] [0085]).
Wheeler does not explicitly teach the first set of packets is associated with a set of frequently-
used routes and the second set of packets is associated with a set of less frequently-used routes compared to the first set of packets.
However, Sakai disclose a navigation device that prioritizes map data updates based on the frequency of use and history of those map sections. Sakai teaches determining request actions with high update necessity by selecting map sections based on passage history, specifically the number of times the current position included in the section has been passed through ([0055]). This teaching is equivalent to the claimed limitation because the system prioritizes map data packets by the number of times the current position has travel through the route. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler to incorporate the teachings of prioritizing map data updates based on the number of times traveled through the route as taught by Sakai based on the motivation to optimizes the network connectivity bandwidth by prefetching and caching map data that is historically most likely to utilize on their routine drives. This provides the benefit of ensuring that map data for the operator’s daily commutes is update to date and available with minimal latency which reduces the overall network transmission and improves the autonomous navigation system.
Regarding Claim 17, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 16. Wheeler further teaches updating the calculated route based on the downloaded first set of packets or the second set of packets (The system dynamically adjusts and updates the vehicle’s route using the map tiles (packets) that are downloaded; [0043] [0086]); and
outputting a second indication of the updated calculated route (Outputting the updated route (plan comprising the sequence of actions) to the control module for the vehicle to navigate the route; [0040] [0043]).
Regarding Claim 18, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 16. Wheeler further teaches transmitting, to the server, a second indication of the calculated route and the set of live parameters (The system transmits information describing the planned route along with real-time live parameters like GPS location and IMU motion data to the online map server; [0046] [0051] [0084]),
wherein receiving the indication of the updated map data comprises receiving the indication of the updated map data based on the calculated route and the set of live parameters (Downloading relevant map updates using the planned route while continuously applying live vehicle parameters to load upcoming map tiles; [0046] [0050] [0086]).
Regarding Claim 21, Wheeler teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a server, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory, the at least one processor(An online map server system comprising processors and memory storage to provide map data to vehicles over a network; [0056]):
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), a first indication of map data (The server transmits HD map data to the vehicle computing system; [0031]);
receive, from the UE, a second indication of a calculated route for the UE,…and a set of live parameters (The server receives information detailing the planned routes and live parameters such as location and motion data from the vehicle; [0051] [0084]);
configure updated map data associated with the calculated route,…and the set of live parameters, wherein the updated map data includes a plurality of packets (The server configures and compresses the relevant updated map data into wire format tiles which structurally constitutes data packets; [0057] [0080]); and
transmit one or more packets in the plurality of packets based on a priority associated with the calculated route,…and the set of live parameters (The server transmits the map tile packets back to the vehicle based on the route and live parameters; [0084]).
Wheeler does not explicitly teach receive, from the UE…a set of frequently used routes, configure updated map data associated with…the set of frequently used routes, and transmit one or more packets…based on a priority associated with…the set of frequently used routes.
However, Sakai discloses a server device that receives map data request, configures, and transmits prioritized map data update sections based on the historical passage frequency of the vehicle. Sakai teaches a server receiving distribution request data for map sections that is determined to have a high update necessity based on the passage history of the section and the sever extracting and transmitting those specific map sections to the device ([0055] [0063]). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitations of receiving, configuring, and transmitting one or more packets based on a set of frequently used routes because receiving request formulated from historical passage counts and transmitting the corresponding map sections is a form of prioritizing map data packets based on the frequency used routes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler to incorporate the teachings of a server receiving requests and transmitting map data prioritized by historical frequency as taught by Sakai based on the motivation to optimize the bandwidth and processing load on the server by prioritizing the map data packets that the user will most likely travel. This provides the benefit of reducing server latency and ensuring that critical map data for a frequent route is transmitted to the vehicle.
Regarding Claim 23, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 21. Wheeler further teaches receive, from the UE, a periodic inquiry for whether there is an update for the map data (The vehicle computing system periodically checks the online HD map system; [0055]),
wherein to transmit the one or more packets one or more packets (When the periodic check results in an updated map, the vehicle computing system request and receives the latest update; [0055] [0084]).
Regarding Claim 24, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 21. Wheeler further teaches the set of live parameters includes a speed of the UE (The vehicle’s parameters are used by the computing system which includes the speed of the vehicle; [0033] [0041]).
Regarding Claim 26, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 21. Wheeler further teaches the map data and the updated map data are high-definition (HD) map data (The map data and updated map data utilized by the vehicle computing system are HD map data; [0031-0032]).
Regarding Claim 27, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 21. Wheeler further teaches the UE is an autonomous driving vehicle (The vehicle computing system is integrated into an autonomous vehicle; [0031] [0034]).
Regarding Claim 28, Wheeler teaches a method of wireless communication at a server, comprising (An online map server system configured to provide map data to vehicles over a network; [0056]):
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a first indication of map data (The server transmits HD map data to the vehicle computing system; [0031]);
receiving, from the UE, a second indication of a calculated route for the UE,… and a set of live parameters (The server receives information detailing the planned routes and live parameters such as location and motion data from the vehicle; [0051] [0084]);
configuring updated map data associated with the calculated route,… and the set of live parameters, wherein the updated map data includes a plurality of packets (The server configures and compresses the relevant updated map data into wire format tiles which structurally constitutes data packets; [0057] [0080]); and
transmitting one or more packets in the plurality of packets based on a priority associated
with the calculated route,…and the set of live parameters (The server transmits the map tile packets back to the vehicle based on the route and live parameters; [0084]).
Wheeler does not explicitly teach receiving, from the UE…a set of frequently used routes, configuring updated map data associated with…the set of frequently used routes, and transmitting one or more packets…based on a priority associated with…the set of frequently used routes.
However, Sakai discloses a server device that receives map data request, configures, and transmits prioritized map data update sections based on the historical passage frequency of the vehicle. Sakai teaches a server receiving distribution request data for map sections that is determined to have a high update necessity based on the passage history of the section and the sever extracting and transmitting those specific map sections to the device ([0055] [0063]). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitations of receiving, configuring, and transmitting one or more packets based on a set of frequently used routes because receiving request formulated from historical passage counts and transmitting the corresponding map sections is a form of prioritizing map data packets based on the frequency used routes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler to incorporate the teachings of a server receiving requests and transmitting map data prioritized by historical frequency as taught by Sakai based on the motivation to optimize the bandwidth and processing load on the server by prioritizing the map data packets that the user will most likely travel. This provides the benefit of reducing server latency and ensuring that critical map data for a frequent route is transmitted to the vehicle.
Claim(s) 12, 20, 25 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wheeler in view of Sakai, as applied in claims 1, 16, and 21, and in further view of Ghosal et al. Secure over-the-air software update for connected vehicles (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389128622004285, 5/21/2025), herein after will be referred to as Ghosal.
Regarding Claim 12, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 1. Wheeler and Sakai does not explicitly teach verify the downloaded first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets
However, Ghosal discloses a secure over-the-air software update technique for vehicles that utilizes cryptographic verification to ensure the authenticity and integrity of the downloaded packages. Ghosal teaches verifying an OTA update package’s integrity by using hashes and if the package fails verification (not authentic or tampered), the vehicle rejects the package and transmits a new request to the server to resend the updates (Section 4, 4.2, 4.3). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitations because the system uses cryptographic verification to reject and re-request compromised OTA update packages.
Wheeler, Sakai, and Ghosal are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of OTA data for vehicle networks. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler and Sakai to incorporate the teachings of verifying the authenticity and integrity of downloaded data for vehicles as taught in Ghosal based on the motivation to ensure the safety and reliability of the navigation system and prevent malicious or corrupted map data to be installed. This provides the benefit of mitigating cyberattacks, tampering, and data corruption during the OTA transmission and ensures the vehicle is using authentic and safe map data.
Regarding Claim 20, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 16. Wheeler and Sakai does not explicitly teach verifying the downloaded first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets first set of packets or the second set of packets
However, Ghosal discloses a secure over-the-air software update technique for vehicles that utilizes cryptographic verification to ensure the authenticity and integrity of the downloaded packages. Ghosal teaches verifying an OTA update package’s integrity by using hashes and if the package fails verification (not authentic or tampered), the vehicle rejects the package and transmits a new request to the server to resend the updates (Sections 4, 4.2, 4.3). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitations because the system uses cryptographic verification to reject and re-request compromised OTA update packages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler and Sakai to incorporate the teachings of verifying the authenticity and integrity of downloaded data for vehicles as taught in Ghosal based on the motivation to ensure the safety and reliability of the navigation system and prevent malicious or corrupted map data to be installed. This provides the benefit of mitigating cyberattacks, tampering, and data corruption during the OTA transmission and ensures the vehicle is using authentic and safe map data.
Regarding Claim 25, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 21. Wheeler and Sakai does not explicitly teach receive, from the UE, a request to resend the one or more packets if the one or more packets are verified to be non-authentic or tampered.
However, Ghosal teaches a server receiving a request from a vehicle for an update package because the vehicle rejected the prior package after verifying its integrity using hashes and finding it non-authentic or not fresh (Sections 4.2, 4.3 and 6.1). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitation because the request for an update software package after a vehicle rejects a corrupted or tampered OTA package performs the functional equivalency to receiving a request to resend the update software package. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler and Sakai to incorporate the teachings of a server receiving a request to resend an update package when a vehicle detects a tampered package as taught by Ghosal based on the motivation to ensure the safety and reliability of the autonomous vehicle’s navigation system by preventing malicious or corrupted map data to be installed. This provides the benefit of mitigating cyberattacks, tampering, and data corruption during the OTA software update.
Regarding Claim 30, Wheeler and Sakai remains as applied above in claim 28. Wheeler and Sakai does not explicitly teach receiving, from the UE, a request to resend the one or more packets if the one or more packets are verified to be non-authentic or tampered.
However, Ghosal teaches a server receiving a request from a vehicle for an update package because the vehicle rejected the prior package after verifying its integrity using hashes and finding it non-authentic or not fresh (Sections 4.2, 4.3 and 6.1). These teachings are equivalent to the claimed limitation because the request for an update software package after a vehicle rejects a corrupted or tampered OTA package performs the functional equivalency to receiving a request to resend the update software package. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wheeler and Sakai to incorporate the teachings of a server receiving a request to resend an update package when a vehicle detects a tampered package as taught by Ghosal based on the motivation to ensure the safety and reliability of the autonomous vehicle’s navigation system by preventing malicious or corrupted map data to be installed. This provides the benefit of mitigating cyberattacks, tampering, and data corruption during the OTA software update.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent, most relevant, to applicant's disclosure.
Yoshioka (US 20070198184 A1)
Sacks (US 20070080830 A1)
Blahut (US 12140450 B2)
Igarashi (US 20210278241 A1)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 9 through 11, filed 12/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 16, 21, and 28 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD ANDREW IZON DIZON whose telephone number is (571)272-4834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, 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.
/EDWARD ANDREW IZON DIZON/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663