9DETAILED 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 .
Priority
1. Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on provisional application filed on 12/06/2022.
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.
Claim(s) 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bai et al (U.S. 2020/0232800) and further in view of Fairfield et al (U.S.2015/0248131).
2. As per claim 1,8 Bai disclosed a method comprising: operating a vehicle in a first environment, the vehicle including a change detection system and at least one sensor configured to obtain data associated with the first environment [FIG. 1 presents a top-down view of an example scenario useful in understanding the present subject matter in which a map discrepancy detection and correction system may be implemented. The example map discrepancy detection and correction system may, in real-time or near real-time, detect a discrepancy in HD mapping data and provide an update to the HD mapping data, for example, in the form of an updated HD image.] (Paragraph. 0045), wherein operating the vehicle in the first environment includes obtaining the data associated with the first environment using the at least one sensor;
obtaining a context map associated with the first environment [In another example, the event insight module 314 is configured to analyze the vehicle sensing data and the pre-planned trajectory data by determining actual vehicle trajectory data from the sensor data and comparing the actual trajectory data with the pre-planned trajectory data. In this example, the event insight module 314 may be further configured to identify an anomaly from the analysis by identifying an unnatural driving behavior such as a sudden lane change, a sudden road exit, or driving in the opposite direction on a map pathway.] (Paragraph. 0071); comparing, using the change detection system, the data associated with the first environment and the context map to identify at least a first inconsistency between the data associated with the first environment and the context map.
However, Bai did not explicitly disclose, “determining, while the vehicle is operating, a resolution for the first inconsistency; and taking an action based on the resolution, wherein the action is taken by the vehicle”.
In the same field of endeavor Fairfield disclosed, “The navigation/pathing system 142 could be configured to determine a driving path for the vehicle 100. The navigation/pathing system 142 may additionally update the driving path dynamically while the vehicle 100 is in operation. In some embodiments, the navigation/pathing system 142 could incorporate data from the sensor fusion algorithm 138, the GPS 122, and known maps so as to determine the driving path for vehicle 100.” (Paragraph. 0044).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing was made to have incorporated the navigation/pathing system 142 could be configured to determine a driving path for the vehicle 100. The navigation/pathing system 142 may additionally update the driving path dynamically while the vehicle 100 is in operation. In some embodiments, the navigation/pathing system 142 could incorporate data from the sensor fusion algorithm 138, the GPS 122, and known maps so as to determine the driving path for vehicle 100as taught by Bai in the method and system Fairfield to increase efficiency of autonomous vehicles in wider variety of environments.
3. As per claims 2,9 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein operating the vehicle in the first environment includes autonomously operating the vehicle in the first environment, wherein obtaining the context map includes obtaining the context map from autonomy system of the vehicle, and wherein comparing the data associated with the first environment and the context map to identify the first inconsistency includes determining at least one probability associated with an existence of the first inconsistency, the context map describing a geographical region, the context map including information about features associated with the geographical region (Bai, Paragraph. 0008).
4. As per claims 3,10,17 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein the first inconsistency is a first feature that is identified in the data associated with the first environment and is not included in the context map, and wherein the at least one probability is a first probability that the first feature is not represented in the context map, the information about the features including information about the features including labels that identify the features and wherein the first probability is determined based on the first feature being identified in the data associated with the first environment within a specified window of time (Bai, Paragraph. 0084).
5. As per claims 4,11,18 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein the first inconsistency is a second feature that is represented in the context map and is not identified in the data associated with first environment, and wherein the at least one probability is a second probability that the feature is missing from the first environment, and wherein the second probability id determined based on the second feature not being identified in the data associated with the first environment within a specified window of time (Bai, Paragraph. 0084).
6. As per claims 5,12,19 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein comparing the data associated with the first environment and the context map to identify the first inconsistency further includes determining a relevance metric associated with the first inconsistency (Bai, Paragraph. 0019).
7. As per claims 6,13 Bai-Fairfield disclosed further including: providing information associated with the first inconsistency to a teleoperations arrangement, wherein determining, while the vehicle is operating, the resolution for the first inconsistency includes determining the resolution at the teleoperations arrangement (Bai, Paragraph. 0086).
8. As per claims 7,14,16 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein the resolution includes the action, the method further including: obtaining, at the vehicle, an instruction from the teleoperations arrangement, the instruction arranged to specify the action, the action being at least one selected from a group including continuing autonomously operating the vehicle, stopping the vehicle, and enabling the vehicle to be operated by the teleoperations arrangement (Bai, Paragraph. 0042).
9. As per claim 20 Bai-Fairfield disclosed where the enterprise system is arranged to use the information associated with the first inconsistency and the first resolution to determine whether to update to the context map (Bai, Paragraph. 0042).
10. As per claim 21 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein operating the vehicle in the first environment includes obtaini Bai-Fairfield ng the data associated with the first environment using the at least one sensor while the vehicle operates at a first speed, and wherein determining, while the vehicle is operating, the resolution for the first inconsistency includes determining the resolution for the first inconsistency while the vehicle is operating at a second speed, the second speed being slower than the first speed (Fairfield, Paragraph. 0075). Claim 21 has the same motivation as claim 1.
11. As per claim 22 Bai-Fairfield disclosed wherein determining, while the vehicle is operating, a resolution for the first inconsistency includes determining the resolution for the first inconsistency onboard the vehicle using the change detection system (Bai, Paragraph. 0054).
12. As per claim 15 Bai-Fairfield disclosed a framework comprising: at least a first vehicle, the first vehicle including a change detection system and at least one sensor configured to obtain data while the first vehicle operates, the first vehicle further arranged to access a context map, wherein the change detection system arranged to compare the data to the context map to identify a first inconsistency (Bai, Paragraph. 0045); a teleoperations arrangement, the teleoperations arrangement configured to monitor the first vehicle (Fairfield, Paragraph. 0051) wherein the first vehicle is arranged to provide information associated with the first inconsistency to teleoperations arrangement, the teleoperations arrangement further being configured to determine a first resolution to the first inconsistency and to provide the first resolution to the first vehicle, the first vehicle further being arranged to take an action in response to the first resolution; and an enterprise system, the enterprise system configured to maintain the context map (Bai, Paragraph. 0042 & 0045), wherein the teleoperations arrangement is arranged to provide the information associated with the first inconsistency and the first resolution to the enterprise system (Fairfield, Paragraph. 0083). Claim 15 has the same motivation as claim 1.
Response to Arguments
13. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-22 have been 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 argument.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the
examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885.The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal
business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821.
15. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published
applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status
information for un published applications is available through Private PAIR only. For
more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you
have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business
Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights