DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This Office action is in reply to filing by applicant on 03/26/2026.
Claims 4 – 11 and 13 – 16 were previously withdrawn by Applicant due to a restriction requirement.
Claims 1 – 3 and 12 were amended by Applicant.
Claims 17 and 18 are new.
Claims 1 – 3, 12, 17, and 18 are currently pending and have been examined.
The prior 35 USC 102/ 103 claim rejections set forth in the Non-Final Rejection of 11/26/2025 as to claims 1 – 3 and 12 are maintained (per 35 USC 103) in view of Applicant's arguments and amendments.
New claims herein (i.e., 17 and 18) are addressed below in the Allowable Subject Matter section.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL
Response to Arguments
There are no new grounds of rejection herein as to any of the claims.
The initial claims of 10/04/2023 were amended substantially in view of examiner’s recent arguments pertaining to them, resulting in the amended claims of 03/26/2026. New art was therefore necessitated to properly analyze per 35 USC 103 those amended claims set forth herein. Please see following 35 USC 103 analysis,
Applicant argues per 35 USC 102/103 that claims 1 – 3 and 12 were improperly previously rejected (see “Amendment / Request for reconsideration” filed 3/26/2026, at pages 10 – 11). Examiner respectfully disagrees and points Applicant generally to the detailed 35 USC 103 analysis below wherein said amended claim portions are addressed.
While Applicant specifically argues as above per 35 USC 102/103 that claims 1 – 3 and 12 were improperly previously rejected, those specific arguments go to the newly amended portions of the claims, which portions were not yet addressed by examiner. As such, Applicant is directed to those newly amended portions of claims 1, 2, 3, and 12 in the following 35 USC 103 analysis, wherein the same are now fairly addressed by examiner.
As to Applicant’s arguments as to new claims 17 and 18 (again, not previously addressed by examiner, see “Amendment / Request for reconsideration” filed 3/26/2026, at pages 11 – 12), examiner directs Applicant to the Allowable Subject Matter section herein.
Generally as to obviousness, examiner submits that it is determined on the basis of the evidence as a whole and the relative persuasiveness of the arguments. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ 685,686 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785,788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143,147 (CCPA 1976). Using this standard, examiner submits that the burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness was successfully established in the prior Office Action of 11/26/2025 and also respecting the pending amended claim set of 03/26/2026, as seen below.
Examiner recognizes that references cannot be arbitrarily altered or modified, and that there must be some reason why a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art would be motivated to make the proposed modifications. Although the motivation or suggestion to make modifications must be articulated, it is respectfully submitted that there is no requirement that the motivation to make modifications must be expressly articulated within the references themselves. References are evaluated by what they suggest to one versed in the art, rather than by their specific disclosures, In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545 (CCPA 1969).
Examiner also notes that the motivation to combine the applied references is, where appropriate in the below detailed analysis pursuant to 35 USC 103, additionally accompanied by select passages from the respective references which specifically support that particular motivation. It is also respectfully submitted that motivation based on the logic and scientific reasoning of one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of the invention, which evidence can also support a finding of obviousness, is otherwise provided in the detailed 35 USC 103 analysis of the claim set below. In re Nilssen, 851 F.2d 1401, 1403, 7 USPQ2d 1500, 1502 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (references do not have to explicitly suggest combining teachings); Ex parte Clapp, 227 USPQ 972 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985) (examiner must present convincing line of reasoning supporting rejection); and Ex parte Levengood, 28 USPQ2d 1300 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1993) (reliance on logic and sound scientific reasoning).
Examiner recognizes that obviousness can only be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC 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 USC 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 USC 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 12 are rejected pursuant to 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Xianglong (US20210001877A1) in view of Kondo (US20210291860A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 12: (independent claim 1 used below reads on independent claim 12):
An on-board device for a vehicle, comprising:
a map data storage unit configured to store map data (“The online HD map system 110 may be configured to send HD map data to the vehicles 150 at the request of the vehicles 150.”, [066]) and (“In an embodiment, the online HD map system 110 may be configured to send portions of the HD map data to the vehicles 150 in a compressed format so that the data transmitted may consume less bandwidth. The online HD map system 110 may be configured to receive from various vehicles 150, information describing the HD map data that may be stored at a local HD map store (e.g., the local HD map store 275 of FIG. 2) of the vehicles 150.”, [068]) and (“Although embodiments of the present disclosure have been described in detail, various changes, substitutions, and alterations could be made hereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the present disclosure.”, [0250]);
including availability information that indicates availability of an auxiliary road marking within an intersection; Examiner broadly interprets this limitation to include the meaning that a vehicle approaching a road intersection may read/ detect signage (i.e., markings/ “availability info”) pertaining to that intersection, that said … (“In some embodiments, the system may determine lane lines based on marking on the road. The system may store metadata describing lanes such as, for example, the direction in which a vehicle is allowed to travel on the lane, whether the lane is a turn lane (e.g., a right turn lane or a left turn lane), etc. At a traffic intersection (also referred to as an intersection), a road often does not have lane markings describing how a vehicle can travel through the intersection. For example, when making a left turn from a particular lane, a vehicle may be limited to entering a specific lane or may be able to enter two or more lanes. Prior to performing the turn, the vehicle may need to determine the lane connectivity indicating which lanes the vehicle can enter after the turn even if there are no lane markings at the intersection. Lane connectivity is often determined based on traffic laws/rules. In some embodiments, the system may use various heuristics [i.e., signage / markings] to determine lane connectivity at an intersection. In some embodiments, the system may determine the lane connectivity and may store the information as metadata that is provided to vehicles for determining how to navigate at the traffic intersection. In some embodiments, the system may determine the lane connectivity and may configure a user interface that displays the determined lane connectivity to a user or operator for verification. The user/operator may approve the lane connectivity at the intersection determined by the system or may manually correct it.”, [0196]), the system determines whether this or that driving option is available to the vehicle at the intersection based on signage it reads/detects;
the auxiliary road marking being a road marking for guiding the vehicle in a direction of travel when the vehicle turns right or left within the intersection; (“The lanes represented by the HD map system 100 may include lanes that are explicitly marked, for example, white and yellow striped lanes, lanes that may be implicit, for example, on a country road with no lines or curbs but may nevertheless have two directions of travel, and implicit paths that may act as lanes, for example, the path that a turning car may make when entering a lane from another lane.”, [0115]);
an availability information acquisition unit configured to acquire the availability information; Examiner broadly interprets this limitation to include the meaning that availability info as it were may be detected / stored by the vehicle, … (“The online HD map system 110 may be configured to receive sensor data that may be captured by sensors of the vehicles 150 and combine data received from the vehicles 150 to generate and maintain HD maps. The online HD map system 110 may be configured to send HD map data to the vehicles 150 for use in driving the vehicles 150.”, [059]) and (“In an embodiment, the online HD map system 110 may be configured to send portions of the HD map data to the vehicles 150 in a compressed format so that the data transmitted may consume less bandwidth. The online HD map system 110 may be configured to receive from various vehicles 150, information describing the HD map data that may be stored at a local HD map store (e.g., the local HD map store 275 of FIG. 2) of the vehicles 150.”, [068]), a vehicle approaching a road intersection may read/ detect actual signage (i.e., road markings), and/or rely on stored maps, pertaining to that intersection;
an availability determination unit configured to determine the availability of the auxiliary road marking within the intersection, indicated by the availability information; and (“In some embodiments, the system may receive information describing an intersection. The information may identify incoming and outgoing lanes for each road at the intersection. The information may further include any turn information that is available based on traffic signs or road markings (e.g., whether a lane is a left turn lane, a right turn lane, a U-turn lane, etc.). The system may iteratively generate various options for the lanes of a particular road at the intersection, with the options specifying the direction in which a vehicle can go in that lane (e.g., left turn only, left turn and straight, right turn only, right turn and straight, left and right turns, etc.). The system may use constraints based on, for example, traffic lights, road signs, road markings (e.g., arrows indicating the lane type such as left turn lane, right turn lane, straight lane, or some combination thereof), traffic laws, traffic rules, physical constraints on vehicles (e.g., large trucks may not be physically able to complete turns from certain lanes), and constraints on lanes on the opposite side of the intersection where the vehicle could potentially go (e.g., if there are no lanes on the right, then the system may not generate any right turn combinations).”, [0198]);
a driving assistance implementation unit configured to: implement driving assistance using the auxiliary road marking in response to the availability determination unit determining that the auxiliary road marking is available for use within the intersection; and (“The system may store metadata describing lanes such as, for example, the direction in which a vehicle is allowed to travel on the lane, whether the lane is a turn lane (e.g., a right turn lane or a left turn lane), etc. At a traffic intersection (also referred to as an intersection), a road often does not have lane markings describing how a vehicle can travel through the intersection. For example, when making a left turn from a particular lane, a vehicle may be limited to entering a specific lane or may be able to enter two or more lanes. Prior to performing the turn, the vehicle may need to determine the lane connectivity indicating which lanes the vehicle can enter after the turn even if there are no lane markings at the intersection. … In some embodiments, the system may determine the lane connectivity and may store the information as metadata that is provided to vehicles for determining how to navigate at the traffic intersection. In some embodiments, the system may determine the lane connectivity and may configure a user interface that displays the determined lane connectivity to a user or operator for verification. The user/operator may approve the lane connectivity at the intersection determined by the system or may manually correct it.”, [0196])
Xianglong does not expressly disclose, but Kondo teaches:
refrain from implementing driving assistance using the auxiliary road marking in response to the availability determination unit determining that the auxiliary road marking is not available for use within the intersection. (“The vehicle control map information 45 a includes, for example, link association information, lane data, road marking paint data, and driving assistance availability information. The link association information indicates relationships between links defined in the map information 30 a and road sections included in the vehicle control map information 45 a. The lane data includes data indicative of lane structures and/or lane shapes for the associated links. The road marking paint data includes data indicative of locations to which road marking paint is applied and/or the details of the locations.”, [026]) and (“The driving assistance availability information indicates whether the target road section is a road section in which the predetermined level of driving assistance control is exercisable. More specifically, the driving assistance availability information is set for each road section defined in the vehicle control map information 45 a and includes a value indicative of whether the target road section is a road section in which the predetermined level of driving assistance control is exercisable. In one example, the value is 1 when the predetermined level of driving assistance control is exercisable, and the value is 0 when the predetermined level of driving assistance control is not exercisable..”, [027]) and (“In the present embodiment, the nodes indicate intersections. The link data includes data indicative of, for example, road types, widths of roads, and the number of lanes. The feature data includes data indicative of the names, categories, locations, and/or shapes of facilities.”, [033]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to have modified Xianglong to incorporate the teachings of Kondo because Xianglong would be more efficient and versatile if it could avoid questionable road sections automatically as done in Kondo. (“Upon acquiring a planned travel route from the navigation system 10, the vehicle control system 45 determines, in accordance with the link association information, road sections included in the vehicle control map information 45 a and associated with links included in the planned travel route. The vehicle control system 45 notifies the navigation system 10 about the driving assistance availability information on the road sections determined.”, Kondo at [048]).
Regarding claim 2:
The combination of Xianglong and Kondo contain all limitations of claim 1:
Xianglong further teaches:
wherein the map data includes vehicle type information regarding a type of the vehicle, associated with the availability information, (“The system may use constraints based on, for example, traffic lights, road signs, road markings (e.g., arrows indicating the lane type such as left turn lane, right turn lane, straight lane, or some combination thereof), traffic laws, traffic rules, physical constraints on vehicles (e.g., large trucks may not be physically able to complete turns from certain lanes), and constraints on lanes on the opposite side of the intersection where the vehicle could potentially go (e.g., if there are no lanes on the right, then the system may not generate any right turn combinations).”, [0198]) and (“The control module 225 may also be configured to receive physical constraints 245 as input. The physical constraints 245 may include the physical capabilities of the corresponding vehicle 150. For example, the corresponding vehicle 150 having a particular make and model may be able to safely make certain types of vehicle movements such as acceleration and turns that another vehicle with a different make and model may not be able to make safely. In addition, the control module 225 may be configured to incorporate the physical constraints 245 in determining the control signals for the vehicle controls 130 of the corresponding vehicle 150. In addition, the control module 225 may be configured to send control signals to the vehicle controls 130 that may cause the corresponding vehicle 150 to execute the specified sequence of actions and may cause the corresponding vehicle 150 to move according to a predetermined set of actions. In some embodiments, the aforementioned steps may be constantly repeated every few seconds and may cause the corresponding vehicle 150 to drive safely along the route that may have been planned for the corresponding vehicle 150.”, [082]);
the availability information acquisition unit is configured to acquire the availability information and the vehicle type information, and (“The control module 225 may also be configured to receive physical constraints 245 as input. The physical constraints 245 may include the physical capabilities of the corresponding vehicle 150. For example, the corresponding vehicle 150 having a particular make and model may be able to safely make certain types of vehicle movements such as acceleration and turns that another vehicle with a different make and model may not be able to make safely.”, [082]);
the availability determination unit is configured to determine the vehicle type information and (“The control module 225 may also be configured to receive physical constraints 245 as input. The physical constraints 245 may include the physical capabilities of the corresponding vehicle 150. For example, the corresponding vehicle 150 having a particular make and model may be able to safely make certain types of vehicle movements such as acceleration and turns that another vehicle with a different make and model may not be able to make safely.”, [082]);
to determine the availability of the auxiliary road marking within the intersection, indicated by the availability information. (“In some embodiments, the system may receive information describing an intersection. The information may identify incoming and outgoing lanes for each road at the intersection. The information may further include any turn information that is available based on traffic signs or road markings (e.g., whether a lane is a left turn lane, a right turn lane, a U-turn lane, etc.). The system may iteratively generate various options for the lanes of a particular road at the intersection, with the options specifying the direction in which a vehicle can go in that lane (e.g., left turn only, left turn and straight, right turn only, right turn and straight, left and right turns, etc.). The system may use constraints based on, for example, traffic lights, road signs, road markings (e.g., arrows indicating the lane type such as left turn lane, right turn lane, straight lane, or some combination thereof), traffic laws, traffic rules, physical constraints on vehicles (e.g., large trucks may not be physically able to complete turns from certain lanes), and constraints on lanes on the opposite side of the intersection where the vehicle could potentially go (e.g., if there are no lanes on the right, then the system may not generate any right turn combinations).”, [0198]).
Claim 3 is rejected pursuant to 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Xianglong (US20210001877A1) in view of Kondo (US20210291860A1) and in further view of Ferguson (US20170278400A1).
Regarding claim 3:
The combination of Xianglong and Kondo contains all limitations of claim 1:
Xianglong further discloses:
the availability information acquisition unit is configured to acquire the availability information and the oncoming vehicle information, and Examiner broadly interprets this limitation to include the meaning that availability info as it were may be detected / stored by the vehicle, … (“The online HD map system 110 may be configured to receive sensor data that may be captured by sensors of the vehicles 150 and combine data received from the vehicles 150 to generate and maintain HD maps. The online HD map system 110 may be configured to send HD map data to the vehicles 150 for use in driving the vehicles 150.”, [059]) and (“In an embodiment, the online HD map system 110 may be configured to send portions of the HD map data to the vehicles 150 in a compressed format so that the data transmitted may consume less bandwidth. The online HD map system 110 may be configured to receive from various vehicles 150, information describing the HD map data that may be stored at a local HD map store (e.g., the local HD map store 275 of FIG. 2) of the vehicles 150.”, [068]), a vehicle approaching a road intersection may read/ detect actual signage (i.e., road markings), and/or rely on stored maps, pertaining to that intersection;[097]);
and to determine the availability of the auxiliary road marking within the intersection, indicated by the availability information. (“In some embodiments, the system may receive information describing an intersection. The information may identify incoming and outgoing lanes for each road at the intersection. The information may further include any turn information that is available based on traffic signs or road markings (e.g., whether a lane is a left turn lane, a right turn lane, a U-turn lane, etc.). The system may iteratively generate various options for the lanes of a particular road at the intersection, with the options specifying the direction in which a vehicle can go in that lane (e.g., left turn only, left turn and straight, right turn only, right turn and straight, left and right turns, etc.). The system may use constraints based on, for example, traffic lights, road signs, road markings (e.g., arrows indicating the lane type such as left turn lane, right turn lane, straight lane, or some combination thereof), traffic laws, traffic rules, physical constraints on vehicles (e.g., large trucks may not be physically able to complete turns from certain lanes), and constraints on lanes on the opposite side of the intersection where the vehicle could potentially go (e.g., if there are no lanes on the right, then the system may not generate any right turn combinations).”, [0198]);
The combination of Xianglong and Kondo do not disclose, but Ferguson teaches:
wherein the map data includes oncoming vehicle information regarding presence or absence of an oncoming vehicle, (“Moreover, while not shown in FIG. 6, the autonomous driving computer system 144 may also detect and track vehicles traveling in an opposite direction. For example, the autonomous driving computer system 144 may detect and track vehicles traveling in an oncoming direction to the autonomous vehicle 104, such as by using one or more of the laser sensor 304, the laser sensor 302, the radar detection unit 308, the camera sensors 314-316, or any other combination of sensors mounted to the autonomous vehicle 104.”, [097]);
the oncoming vehicle information being associated with the availability information, (“FIG. 20 illustrates example lane elements 3940 (orange), lane boundaries 3920 (yellow), navigable boundaries 3912 (red), and lane cuts 3930 (green). FIG. 21 illustrates an example intersection with example lane connectors 4010 connecting example lane elements 4020. The connectivity of the three lane elements 4020 may be calculated from their spatial relations. For example, an automatic template matching algorithm may be used to infer the connectivity of the lane elements at intersections and automatically create lane connectors. Alternatively, a human may draw lane connectors. Specific fields of a lane element include any of the following: left lane line, right lane line, reference to incoming LaneEls, reference to outgoing LaneEls, reference to left and right adjacent LaneEls (if any, and there may be a LaneEl traveling in the opposite direction, which may only be considered adjacent if it is clearly navigable, but not if there is a curb or barrier between), left lane restriction (e.g., whether you can legally cross on the left or not), right lane restriction, termination restriction (e.g., a semantic termination restriction for the outgoing end of the LaneEl, such as a stop line), speed limit, vertical clearance, keep clear, the spatial bounds, references to related features (e.g., signs or lights), and/or left and right navigable surface polylines.”,
the utilization availability determination unit is configured to determine the oncoming vehicle information Moreover, while not shown in FIG. 6, the autonomous driving computer system 144 may also detect and track vehicles traveling in an opposite direction. For example, the autonomous driving computer system 144 may detect and track vehicles traveling in an oncoming direction to the autonomous vehicle 104, such as by using one or more of the laser sensor 304, the laser sensor 302, the radar detection unit 308, the camera sensors 314-316, or any other combination of sensors mounted to the autonomous vehicle 104.”, [097]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to have modified Xianglong to incorporate the teachings of Ferguson because Xianglong would be more efficient and versatile if it could additionally consider oncoming traffic in its various analyses as done in Ferguson (“Although FIG. 9 illustrates that the autonomous vehicle 104 may detect vehicles 904-908 and vehicles 910-914 travelling in front and behind, respectively, the autonomous vehicle 104 may also detect vehicles travelling in a different lane (e.g., any of vehicles 916-922) or vehicles travelling in a different direction, such as vehicles travelling in an oncoming direction relative to the autonomous vehicle 104.), see [0120] of Ferguson.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to be in an independent form. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Independently, while the claims' limitations most recently set forth herein may individually be disclosed by the prior art, the claims as a whole are not obvious because the examiner would have to improperly use their separate limitations as a road map to combine them.
CONCLUSION
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached form 892.
Stein (US10908606B2) - A system for autonomously navigating a vehicle along a road segment may include at least one processor. The at least one processor may be programmed to receive from at least one sensor information relating to one or more aspects of the road segment. The processor may also be programmed to determine a local feature of the road segment based on the received information. Further the processor may be programmed to compare the local feature to a predetermined signature feature for the road segment. The processor may be programmed to determine a current location of the vehicle along a predetermined road model trajectory associated with the road segment based on the comparison of the received information and the predetermined signature feature. The processor may also be programmed to determine an autonomous steering action for the vehicle based on a direction of the predetermined road model trajectory at the determined location.
Feng (US11454513B2) - - This application provides a method and an apparatus for generating road network data of an intersection area, and the intersection area connects a plurality of roads. The method includes: obtaining data of a road link of each of the plurality of roads, where the road link includes an entry link and an exit link; calculating coordinates of an intersection point of an extension line of the entry link of each road and an extension line of an exit link of a neighboring road based on the data of the road link of each of the plurality of roads, where the coordinates of the intersection point are coordinates of an intersection node; and the neighboring road is a road counterclockwise adjacent to the road; or the neighboring road is a road clockwise adjacent to the road, where two intersection nodes in sequence are endpoints of an intra-intersection link.
Amnon (US20170008562A1) - A system for autonomously navigating a vehicle along a road segment is disclosed. The system may have at least one processor. The processor may be programmed to receive from an image capture device at least one image representative of an environment of the vehicle. The processor may also be programmed to analyze the at least one image to identify at least one recognized landmark. Further, the processor may be programmed to determine a current location of the vehicle relative to a predetermined road model trajectory associated with the road segment based, at least in part, on a predetermined location of the recognized landmark. In addition, the processor may be programmed to determine an autonomous steering action for the vehicle based on a direction of the predetermined road model trajectory at the determined current location of the vehicle relative to the predetermined road model trajectory.
Kunio (US20210182575A1_ In a device for generating travel trajectory data in an intersection, a road marking recognizer is configured to recognize a road marking in the intersection using captured image data of the intersection. A travel trajectory data generator is configured to, in response to a result of recognition by the road marking recognizer, generate travel trajectory data that is data enabling specification of a travel trajectory in the intersection for autonomous driving.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW COBB whose telephone number is (571) 272-3850. The examiner can normally be reached 9 - 5, M - F.
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 call examiner Cobb as above, or 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, Peter Nolan, can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
/MATTHEW COBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights