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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant Amendment and Arguments filed on 3/30/2026.
Claim(s) 8 was canceled
Claim(s) 1 – 7, 9, and 19-21 are pending for examination.
This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the previous rejection of claims 1-7 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are deemed moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's Amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar) and Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park).
Jatt and Park were cited in a previous office action.
Regarding Claim 1, Jatt teaches A method for automatically testing vehicle braking systems, the method comprising: receiving, with a computing system, an input associated with performing an autonomous brake test of a vehicle braking system of a work vehicle;
{Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
As the process is automated an automated command (input) must be provided.
Para [0132] “Processing device 1002 represents one or more general-purpose processing devices such as a microprocessor, central processing unit, or the like. More particularly, processing device 1002 can be a complex instruction set computing (CISC) microprocessor, reduced instruction set computing (RISC) microprocessor, very long instruction word (VLIW) microprocessor, processor implementing other instruction sets, or processors implementing a combination of instruction sets. Processing device 1002 can also be one or more special-purpose processing devices such as an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field programmable gate array (FPGA), a digital signal processor (DSP), network processor, or the like. In accordance with one or more aspects of the present disclosure, processing device 1002 can be configured to execute instructions performing method 500 of commencing an autonomous driving mission, method 600 of verifying a correct tractor-to-load matching in autonomous trucking missions, method 650 of performing brake testing for autonomous trucking missions, method 700 of automated hitching of a trailer to an ADT, method 750 of automated refueling of an ADT, method 800 of performing an autonomous delivery of a trailer load, and method 900 of parking an autonomous vehicle with subsequent resuming of autonomous driving operations.”
}
wherein the input is associated with a determination that the work vehicle has achieved a first stopped condition upon
{para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
}
the first stopped condition occurring: during a semi-automated brake test performed immediately before the autonomous brake test, or during a given period of time before the autonomous brake test;
{para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
Where the vehicle is stopped for a period because of the static test before dynamic test
}
in response to the input, autonomously releasing, with the computing system, the vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system;
{Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
Starts stopped and then accelerates so its implied brakes are released.
}
autonomously engaging, with the computing system, a drive system of the work vehicle to initiate movement of the work vehicle;
{Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
Starts stopped and then accelerates so its implied brakes are released.
}
autonomously applying, with the computing system, the vehicle brake once the work vehicle has reached a predetermined speed or once the work vehicle has traveled a predetermined distance; and
{Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
}
{Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
}
Jatt does not explicitly teach,
manual application of a vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system by an operator
and
and determining, with the computing system, whether the work vehicle has achieved a stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake.
However, Eldar teaches manual application of a vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system by an operator
{Para [0105] “As used throughout this disclosure, the term “autonomous vehicle” refers to a vehicle capable of implementing at least one navigational change without driver input. A “navigational change” refers to a change in one or more of steering, braking, or acceleration of the vehicle. To be autonomous, a vehicle need not be fully automatic (e.g., fully operation without a driver or without driver input). Rather, an autonomous vehicle includes those that can operate under driver control during certain time periods and without driver control during other time periods. Autonomous vehicles may also include vehicles that control only some aspects of vehicle navigation, such as steering (e.g., to maintain a vehicle course between vehicle lane constraints), but may leave other aspects to the driver (e.g., braking) In some cases, autonomous vehicles may handle some or all aspects of braking, speed control, and/or steering of the vehicle.”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt to incorporate the teachings of Eldar to have the driver be able to manually apply the brake because it would be obvious to try. There are only two general options for applying the brake. Autonomously or manually, thus it would not require undue experimentation to have the driver manually apply the brake instead of the autonomous system.
Jatt in view of Eldar does not explicitly teach, and determining, with the computing system, whether the work vehicle has achieved a stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake.
However, Park teaches autonomously applying, with the computing system, the vehicle brake once the work vehicle has reached a predetermined speed or once the work vehicle has traveled a second predetermined distance; and determining, with the computing system, whether the work vehicle has achieved a stopped condition upon autonomous application of the vehicle brake.
{Para [0038-0039] “FIG. 11 is a flowchart illustrating a method of testing the brake device in the roll and brake automatic test system according to the exemplary embodiment of the present invention. The method described herein below may be executed by the above-described controllers. Referring to FIG. 11, a control operation starts in S110, and a travel speed of the vehicle may be measured in S111 using a sensor. In S112, whether the vehicle enters a braking section may be determined and in response to determining that the vehicle enters the braking section, S113 may be performed, otherwise, S111 may be performed. In S113, the oil of the master cylinder 417 may be supplied to the inlet side of the pump 405, as illustrated in FIG. 7. Further, in S114, a duty value applied to the motor 410 and the TC valve 412 may be calculated or selected.
As illustrated in FIG. 9, in S115, a duty value applied to the motor 410 may be adjusted to a set value, and in S116, a duty value applied to the TC valve 412 may be adjusted to a set value. In S117, whether a speed of the vehicle 110 (e.g., a speed of the rear wheel) is zero may be determined, and S114 may be performed when the speed of the vehicle 110 greater than zero, or S118 may be performed when the speed of the vehicle 110 is zero. In S118, the motor may be is turned off, electric power to be applied to the TC valve 412 may be turned off, and a flow path may be closed.”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar to incorporate the teachings of Park to determine when the speed is zero by computer because as discussed in Park para [0006] “The present invention provides a roll and brake automatic test system and method that improve productivity and stability by deriving uniform test results regardless of inspectors, time, and driving conditions.”
Regarding Claim 4, Jatt and Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1. Jatt further teaches wherein autonomously applying the vehicle brake comprises autonomously applying the vehicle brake once the work vehicle has reached the predetermined speed, wherein the predetermined speed is at least 0.5 kilometers per hour.
{ Para [0069] “Safe operations of autonomous vehicles depend on reliability of various systems and components of the vehicles. Automated checks of such systems, e.g., the braking system, can improve safety of a trucking mission, when performed prior to (or after) the mission or prior to (or after) any part of the mission, e.g., the travel between hub H1 and hub H2. A designated brake-testing area can be designated at hub H1, where the tractor or the assembled tractor-trailer combination can perform pre-trip (or post-trip) brake inspections without human intervention or with minimal human intervention. The brake-testing area can be a designated lane, an elongated parking spot, or a similar area of hub H1 (or hub H2). Some or a part of the brake-testing area can be on an uphill or downhill section of the road surface. In some implementations, a special dedicated testing tractor can be used to test brakes of a trailer. This can have an advantage that trailers can be tested before an autonomous tractor arrives for trailer pick-up, reducing time for forming mission-ready vehicles. In some implementations, a dyno (dynamometer) testing robot can be used in place of the testing tractor. The dyno robot can attach to a (loaded) trailer and simulate forces exerted on the trailer during uphill/or downhill motion. The robot can connect to electrical, pneumatic, and other systems of the trailer and cause the braking systems of the trailer to operate during dyno testing as if operating on an actual highway. After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
}
Regarding Claim 20, Jatt and Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1. Park further teaches wherein autonomously applying the vehicle brake comprises autonomously applying the vehicle brake once the work vehicle has reached the predetermined distance,
{Para [0038-0039] “FIG. 11 is a flowchart illustrating a method of testing the brake device in the roll and brake automatic test system according to the exemplary embodiment of the present invention. The method described herein below may be executed by the above-described controllers. Referring to FIG. 11, a control operation starts in S110, and a travel speed of the vehicle may be measured in S111 using a sensor. In S112, whether the vehicle enters a braking section may be determined and in response to determining that the vehicle enters the braking section, S113 may be performed, otherwise, S111 may be performed. In S113, the oil of the master cylinder 417 may be supplied to the inlet side of the pump 405, as illustrated in FIG. 7. Further, in S114, a duty value applied to the motor 410 and the TC valve 412 may be calculated or selected.
Jatt teaches wherein the predetermined distance is at least 1 meter.
{ Para [0069] “In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
Given typical tractor trailer acceleration, more than 1 meter of distance is required to accelerate to 10 mph. Regardless 1 meter of distance as the predetermined distance would be a matter of design choice.
}
Regarding Claim 21, Jatt and Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1. Jatt further teaches wherein when the stopped condition occurs during the given period of time, the semi-automated brake test is skipped.
{Para [0069] “After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes. In various implementations, the order of brake testing can be performed in different orders. In one exemplary implementation, the vehicle can enter the designated brake testing area and stop on a downhill section of the area to perform static testing of parking brakes. The vehicle can then accelerate downhill (optionally, several times) to 5-10 mph to perform a series of dynamic tests of service (and/or secondary) brakes. Some of the tests can involve bringing the vehicle to a complete stop whereas some of the tests can result only in the vehicle slowing down without stopping completely.”
Thus the static test may be skipped as all tests need not be performed.
}
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar), Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park), and Merg et al. (US 20230192112 A1, hereinafter known as Merg).
Merg was cited in a previous office action.
Regarding Claim 2, Jatt in view of Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1.
Jatt in view of Eldar and Park does not explicitly teach, wherein the computing system comprises a graphical user interface to provide interactive instructions to an operator of the work vehicle.
However, Merg teaches wherein the computing system comprises a graphical user interface to provide interactive instructions to an operator of the work vehicle.
{Para [0431] “In at least some implementations, in response to a selection of the USC 405, the processor 102 can cause the display 122 to display a GUI, such as a GUI 763 shown in FIG. 55. As an example, the GUI 763 includes a USC 767, 768 and an instruction 770 to guide a user of the computing system 100 in requesting performance of a functional test. In response to a selection of the USC 768, the processor 102 transmits a vehicle data message to request performance of the functional test. In response to a selection of the USC 767, the processor 102 ceases displaying the GUI 763. The processor 102 can then return to displaying the GUI 296. As an example, the GUI 763 can be overlaid upon the GUI 296. As another example, the GUI 763 can be arranged as a GUI that is displayed in place of the GUI 296.”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar Park to incorporate the teachings of Merg to have a GUI with instructions because as discussed in para [0431] it helps guide an operator through a diagnostic process increasing easy of use.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar), Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park), and Samper et al. (US 20180143628 A1, hereinafter known as Samper).
Regarding Claim 3, Jatt in view of Eldarand Park teaches The method of claim 1. Park further teaches wherein the computing system determines the first and second stopped condition according to a response from at least one
{Fig. 11 and Para [0038-0039] “FIG. 11 is a flowchart illustrating a method of testing the brake device in the roll and brake automatic test system according to the exemplary embodiment of the present invention. The method described herein below may be executed by the above-described controllers. Referring to FIG. 11, a control operation starts in S110, and a travel speed of the vehicle may be measured in S111 using a sensor. In S112, whether the vehicle enters a braking section may be determined and in response to determining that the vehicle enters the braking section, S113 may be performed, otherwise, S111 may be performed. In S113, the oil of the master cylinder 417 may be supplied to the inlet side of the pump 405, as illustrated in FIG. 7. Further, in S114, a duty value applied to the motor 410 and the TC valve 412 may be calculated or selected.
As illustrated in FIG. 9, in S115, a duty value applied to the motor 410 may be adjusted to a set value, and in S116, a duty value applied to the TC valve 412 may be adjusted to a set value. In S117, whether a speed of the vehicle 110 (e.g., a speed of the rear wheel) is zero may be determined, and S114 may be performed when the speed of the vehicle 110 greater than zero, or S118 may be performed when the speed of the vehicle 110 is zero. In S118, the motor may be is turned off, electric power to be applied to the TC valve 412 may be turned off, and a flow path may be closed.”
}
Jatt in view of Eldar and Park does not explicitly teach, determines the first and second stopped condition according to a response from at least one perception sensor, the at least one perception sensor comprising at least one of a camera or a LIDAR sensor.
However, Samper teaches determines the first and second stopped condition according to a response from at least one perception sensor, the at least one perception sensor comprising at least one of a camera or a LIDAR sensor.
{Para [0030] “In some implementations, the system may perform similar functions at a “STOP” sign. Such operation may resemble the functions described above with respect to traffic light 150. For example, when a driver approaches a “STOP” sign and brings the vehicle to a stop (e.g., stop state), the system may determine that the driver has stopped the vehicle at the “STOP” sign based on one or more images captured by the first camera 115, LIDAR, and/or radar.”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar and Park to incorporate the teachings of Samper to determine the stopped condition using a camera or lidar because it would be obvious to try. There are only so many sensors that can detect motion and there are well known algorithms for detecting motion in images/ point clouds.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar), Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park), and Yuan et al. (US 20250018912 A1, hereinafter known as Yuan).
Yuan was cited in a previous office action.
Regarding Claim 5, Jatt and Park teaches The method of claim 1.
Jatt in view of Eldar and Park does not explicitly teach, wherein, when the computing system determines the work vehicle is not in the stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake, the computing system is configured to perform a corrective action to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
However, Yuan teaches wherein, when the computing system determines the work vehicle is not in the stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake, the computing system is configured to perform a corrective action to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
{Para [0144] “In one or more embodiments, depending upon the braking systems available to the AD PnC and the extent of the failures, engine braking may be the primary or only means available to slow the vehicle. Engine braking (and, if available, other braking) may be applied (1350) until a speed condition is reached (1345) (e.g., the vehicle is slowed to below a certain speed). Once that speed condition has been reached, the EPB may be requested (1355). The EPB may be monitored and the EPB may continue to be applied until it has been determined that the braking calibers of the EPB have successfully closed (1360). Once the EPB has successfully engaged, the PBS, SBS, or both (if present) may be released (1375).”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar and Park to incorporate the teachings of Yuan to perform corrective action to stop the vehicle because as is known in the art having a backup system to brake the vehicle is important for safety as a runaway vehicle may cause injuries/fatalities.
Regarding Claim 6, Jatt in view of Eldar, Park, and Yuan teaches The method of claim 5. Yuan further teaches wherein the corrective action comprises automatic engagement of the drive system to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
{Para [0144] “In one or more embodiments, depending upon the braking systems available to the AD PnC and the extent of the failures, engine braking may be the primary or only means available to slow the vehicle. Engine braking (and, if available, other braking) may be applied (1350) until a speed condition is reached (1345) (e.g., the vehicle is slowed to below a certain speed). Once that speed condition has been reached, the EPB may be requested (1355). The EPB may be monitored and the EPB may continue to be applied until it has been determined that the braking calibers of the EPB have successfully closed (1360). Once the EPB has successfully engaged, the PBS, SBS, or both (if present) may be released (1375).”
}
Claim(s) 5 and 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar), Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park), and Zhang et al. (US 20240317197 A1, hereinafter known as Zhang).
Regarding Claim 5, Jatt In view of Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1.
Jatt in view of Eldar and Park does not explicitly teach, wherein, when the computing system determines the work vehicle is not in the stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake, the computing system is configured to perform a corrective action to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
However, Zhang teaches wherein, when the computing system determines the work vehicle is not in the stopped condition upon application of the vehicle brake, the computing system is configured to perform a corrective action to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
{Para [0020] “Embodiments described herein address the above-referenced issues by providing techniques that include a continuous monitoring of an AV's braking systems using a sensor-based feedback to handle various brake failure modes. The techniques can mitigate the effect of brake failure by using a fault management system that can respond based on a severity of a brake failure and issue an alert to a driver or a remote control center. An AV can include (1) a primary or foundation braking system comprising a first braking system that can be activated via a first actuator and a second braking system that can be actuated via a second actuator, and (2) a supplemental or endurance braking system. According to various embodiments, the primary braking system may be activated through two separate and distinct actuators. If either the first braking system or the second braking system fails while the AV is in an autonomous mode, the AV can failover to the functioning braking system. If both the first braking system and the second braking system fail, the AV can fail over to an endurance braking system and transmit a request for the driver to assume control of the AV. In each case, the AV can be responsive to the braking system failure, including a severity of the failure.”
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar and Park to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to perform corrective action to stop the vehicle because as is known in the art having a backup system to brake the vehicle is important for safety as a runaway vehicle may cause injuries/fatalities.
Regarding Claim 7, Jatt in view of Eldar, Park, and Zhang teaches The method of claim 5. Zhang further teaches wherein the corrective action comprises prompting an operator to apply the vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system to bring the work vehicle into the stopped condition.
{Para [0020] “Embodiments described herein address the above-referenced issues by providing techniques that include a continuous monitoring of an AV's braking systems using a sensor-based feedback to handle various brake failure modes. The techniques can mitigate the effect of brake failure by using a fault management system that can respond based on a severity of a brake failure and issue an alert to a driver or a remote control center. An AV can include (1) a primary or foundation braking system comprising a first braking system that can be activated via a first actuator and a second braking system that can be actuated via a second actuator, and (2) a supplemental or endurance braking system. According to various embodiments, the primary braking system may be activated through two separate and distinct actuators. If either the first braking system or the second braking system fails while the AV is in an autonomous mode, the AV can failover to the functioning braking system. If both the first braking system and the second braking system fail, the AV can fail over to an endurance braking system and transmit a request for the driver to assume control of the AV. In each case, the AV can be responsive to the braking system failure, including a severity of the failure.”
}
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park) and Soumi (US 20200122703 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Jatt and Park teaches The method of claim 1.
Jatt in view of Park does not explicitly teach, wherein the vehicle brake is a spring applied, hydraulic release brake, wherein autonomously releasing the vehicle brake comprises supplying pressurized fluid to a braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake and wherein autonomously applying the vehicle brake comprises releasing pressurized fluid from the braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake.
However, Soumi teaches wherein the vehicle brake is a spring applied, hydraulic release brake, wherein autonomously releasing the vehicle brake comprises supplying pressurized fluid to a braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake and wherein autonomously applying the vehicle brake comprises releasing pressurized fluid from the braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake.
{Para [0004] “In mines and at other work sites different type of wheeled mine vehicles are used. The mine vehicles are provided with one or more mine working devices for executing mine work task at the work site. The mine vehicle may be a wheel loader, a transport vehicle or dumper, a rock drilling rig, a bolting or reinforcing vehicle or a measuring vehicle. The mine vehicles are heavy weight vehicles which are typically provided with spring-applied brakes for safety reasons. Such spring-applied hydraulically-released brake systems (SAHR) are used in mine vehicles to provide automatic fail-safe braking on loss of vehicle power or hydraulic fluid pressure. However, when a mine vehicle equipped with such brakes becomes disabled at the work site and the mine vehicle needs to be towed away, then the brakes have to be pressurized by means of an external pressure source for releasing the brakes. Different release systems are developed for pressurizing the brake systems and for controlling them. However, the present systems have shown to contain some disadvantages.”
Where as is known in the art SARH are brakes where releasing the vehicle brake comprises supplying pressurized fluid to a braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake and wherein applying the vehicle brake comprises releasing pressurized fluid from the braking cylinder associated with the vehicle brake
Jatt and Park teach the braking being performed autonomously as discussed in the claim 1 rejection.
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Park to incorporate the teachings of Suomi to use spring-applied hydraulically-released brake systems because they improve safety by braking the vehicle under loss of power as discussed in para [0004] of Soumi.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jatt et al. (US 20230123587 A1, hereinafter known as Jatt) in view of Eldar et al. (US 20210064057 A1, hereinafter known as Eldar), Park et al. (US 20180162337 A1, hereinafter known as Park), and 19VAC30-70-90.
Regarding Claim 9, Jatt in view of Eldar and Park teaches The method of claim 1.
Jatt teaches wherein the semi-automated brake test comprises performing, with a computing system, the semi-automated brake test on a vehicle braking system of a work vehicle while the work vehicle is in a stopped condition, prompting
{para[0069] “After arriving at the brake-testing area, the autonomous vehicle can perform some or all of the following tests: static testing of the trailer parking brake, stationary test of the tractor parking brake, static testing of both the trailer and the tractor parking brakes, dynamic (e.g., after an accelerated motion of the tractor or the tractor-trailer combination) test of service brake (and/or a secondary brake) of the trailer, dynamic brake test of the combination of the tractor and trailer service (and/or secondary) brakes.”
Eldar as discussed in the claim 1 rejection teaches that autonomous vehicles can be operated in a semiautonomous manner.
}
Jatt in view of Eldar and Park does not explicitly teach, wherein performing the semi-automated brake test comprises: prompting the operator to apply a vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system; autonomously engaging a drive system of the work vehicle while the operator maintains the vehicle brake applied; and determining whether the work vehicle remains in the first stopped condition during the performance of the semi-automated brake test.
However, 19VAC30-70-90 teaches wherein performing the semi-automated brake test comprises: prompting the operator to apply a vehicle brake of the vehicle braking system; autonomously engaging a drive system of the work vehicle while the operator maintains the vehicle brake applied; and determining whether the work vehicle remains in the first stopped condition during the performance of the semi-automated brake test.
{Page 15-16 “19VAC30-70-90. Brakes: emergency, parking, or holding; batteries.
B. Inspect for and reject if:….
….6. Parking brake will not hold the vehicle stationary with the engine running at slightly accelerated speed with shift lever in drive position for automatic transmission or shift lever in low gear with clutch engaged for standard shift transmission.
7. Holding brake will not disengage when engine is started and vehicle is placed in drive. Holding brake will not hold vehicle stationary with foot on holding brake and vehicle in drive.”
Where it is being determined if the vehicle stays stationary with brake held and engine power applied.
Jatt already teaches applying engine power autonomously.
Ultimately the above limitation is merely reciting and partially automating generic safety inspection procedure.
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jatt in view of Eldar and Park to incorporate the teachings of 19VAC30-70-90 to perform static brake testing because it is common safety inspection procedure that helps ensure the vehicle is capable of operating safely.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MATTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4296. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, James Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. 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.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights