DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim status
2. In response to the amendments filed 01/08/2026, claims 1, 12 and 19 were amended and no new claims were canceled and/or added. Therefore, claims 1-20 are currently pending for examination.
Double Patenting
3. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-10, 11-15 and 18-23 of US Patent No. 11,830,362. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because “predicting at least one ice hazard on a road in a geographic segment of the locations, wherein the predicting of the at least one ice hazard on the road is based at least in part on rain fall detected by one of the vehicles in the geographic segment and a temperature of the geographic segment”, “updating a map to indicate the weather hazard statuses, wherein the update to the map is configured to cause at least one of the plurality of vehicles at a location with a weather hazard status to, based on the update to the map, reduce speed, change a driving mode, or change a configuration of an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), or any combination thereof.” and “the operating conditions are related to activation of windshield wipers of the plurality of vehicles” are conventional prior art features and the use of such feature in claims 1-4, 6-10, 11-15 and 18-23 of US Patent No. 11,830,362 would have been obvious (see the analysis in the prior art rejection) and would not have involved a patentable invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velusamy (US 2016/0042644) in view of Raul et al. (Raul; US 2022/0205807) and further in view of Lorenz et al. (Lorenz; US 2020/0066144).
For claim 1, Velusamy discloses a device [Fig. 1], comprising:
at least one processor [E.g. 0018, 0029]; and
memory [E.g. 0026-0027, 0030], storing instructions configured to instruct the at least one processor to:
communicate with a plurality of vehicles to receive data configured to identify locations of the vehicles and operating conditions of the vehicles [E.g. 0009, 0024: a TCU device may provide substantially all of the data relating to the vehicle and its location, motion, or acceleration. The TCU device may collect large amounts of data regarding the vehicle 116 to which it is attached, including: location (GPS, GLONASS), engine status, speed, stops, starts, temperature, acceleration values, nearby Wi-Fi signals, accelerometer data, brake applications, gyroscope sensor information, height information from an altimeter, visual information from a camera communicatively coupled to the TCU device, audio from a microphone, or revolutions per minute (RPM) of the vehicle's engine, for example. Data may be gathered from multiple TCU devices on multiple vehicles, and it should be appreciated that “TCU device” may refer to “one or more TCU devices.” Such data may be gathered anonymously. The data may be gathered in response to a command from user 110. The data may be automatically gathered at regular intervals. The data may be gathered based on remote signals received from conditions server 102. The TCU device may include a number of sensors including an accelerometer, barometer, altimeter, and gyroscope, for example. Sensors within mobile device 130 may similarly include an accelerometer, gyroscope, or GPS sensor, for example; 0025: Exemplary data that may be captured by the TCU device over a period of time includes location (e.g., latitude, longitude and/or altitude), heading (e.g., degrees), weather conditions (e.g., degrees, precipitation), whether the window wipers are on/off, vehicle speed, vehicle status, whether the headlights are on/off, application of brakes, wheel slippage, skidding, sliding, rate of acceleration (measured in g's in the x, y, z directions, for example), pressure values (e.g., kPa), altitude, grade (rate of incline/decline), forces at wheels, use of the vehicle's horn, damping forces, fuel consumption, etc. All or a subset of this data may be used by the conditions server 102 to determine road conditions and generate alerts, 0034, 0036-0038];
determine, from the operating conditions of the vehicles, weather hazard statuses at the locations [0024: a TCU device may provide substantially all of the data relating to the vehicle and its location, motion, or acceleration. The TCU device may collect large amounts of data regarding the vehicle 116 to which it is attached, including: location (GPS, GLONASS), engine status, speed, stops, starts, temperature, acceleration values, nearby Wi-Fi signals, accelerometer data, brake applications, gyroscope sensor information, height information from an altimeter, visual information from a camera communicatively coupled to the TCU device, audio from a microphone, or revolutions per minute (RPM) of the vehicle's engine, for example. Data may be gathered from multiple TCU devices on multiple vehicles, and it should be appreciated that “TCU device” may refer to “one or more TCU devices.” Such data may be gathered anonymously. The data may be gathered in response to a command from user 110. The data may be automatically gathered at regular intervals. The data may be gathered based on remote signals received from conditions server 102. The TCU device may include a number of sensors including an accelerometer, barometer, altimeter, and gyroscope, for example. Sensors within mobile device 130 may similarly include an accelerometer, gyroscope, or GPS sensor, for example; 0025: Exemplary data that may be captured by the TCU device over a period of time includes location (e.g., latitude, longitude and/or altitude), heading (e.g., degrees), weather conditions (e.g., degrees, precipitation), whether the window wipers are on/off, vehicle speed, vehicle status, whether the headlights are on/off, application of brakes, wheel slippage, skidding, sliding, rate of acceleration (measured in g's in the x, y, z directions, for example), pressure values (e.g., kPa), altitude, grade (rate of incline/decline), forces at wheels, use of the vehicle's horn, damping forces, fuel consumption, etc. All or a subset of this data may be used by the conditions server 102 to determine road conditions and generate alerts].
Velusamy fails to expressly disclose wherein a determination of the weather hazard statuses comprises predicting at least one ice hazard on a road in a geographic segment of the locations, wherein the predicting of the at least one ice hazard on the road is based at least in part on rain fall detected by one of the vehicles in the geographic segment and a temperature of the geographic segment.
However, as shown by Raul, it was well known in the art of vehicle collected weather data to include wherein a determination of weather hazard statuses comprises predicting at least one ice hazard on a road in a geographic segment of the locations, wherein the predicting of the at least one ice hazard on the road is based at least in part on rain fall detected by one of the vehicles in the geographic segment and a temperature of the geographic segment [E.g. 0018, 0026, 0044].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle collected weather data before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Velusamy with the teaching of Raul in order to enable vehicles to collect weather data that can affect the driving condition so that a more cautious driving can be performed when necessary and thereby improve the overall safety on the road.
Velusamy in view of Raul fails to expressly disclose update a map to indicate the weather hazard statuses, wherein the update to the map is configured to cause at least one of the plurality of vehicles at a location with a weather hazard status to, based on the update to the map, reduce speed, increase a following distance to another vehicle, change a driving mode, or change a configuration of an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), or any combination thereof.
However, as shown by Lorenz, it was well known in the art of vehicle collected weather data to include update a map to indicate the weather hazard statuses [E.g. 0043, 0063-0064, 0069, 0094], wherein the update to the map is configured to cause at least one of the plurality of vehicles at a location with a weather hazard status to, based on the update to the map, reduce speed [E.g. 0078], increase a following distance to another vehicle, change a driving mode, or change a configuration of an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), or any combination thereof.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle collected weather data before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Velusamy in view of Raul with the teaching of Lorenz in order to enable transmitting weather data that can affect the driving condition to vehicles on the road so that the vehicles are driven accordingly and thereby improve the overall traffic and safety on the road.
For claim 2, Velusamy discloses an interface configured to send a communication to a vehicle in a geographic segment that contains the locations, the communication configured to identify the weather hazard statuses [E.g. 0025-0026, 0034-0040, 0064].
For claim 3, Velusamy discloses wherein the interface is further configured to receive the data configured to identify the locations of the vehicles and the operating conditions of the vehicles [E.g. 0025-0026, 0034-0040, 0064].
For claim 4, Velusamy discloses wherein the operating conditions are related to activation of windshield wipers of the plurality of vehicles [E.g. 0025: Exemplary data that may be captured by the TCU device over a period of time includes location (e.g., latitude, longitude and/or altitude), heading (e.g., degrees), weather conditions (e.g., degrees, precipitation), whether the window wipers are on/off, vehicle speed, vehicle status, whether the headlights are on/off, application of brakes, wheel slippage, skidding, sliding, rate of acceleration (measured in g's in the x, y, z directions, for example), pressure values (e.g., kPa), altitude, grade (rate of incline/decline), forces at wheels, use of the vehicle's horn, damping forces, fuel consumption, etc. All or a subset of this data may be used by the conditions server 102 to determine road conditions and generate alerts].
For claim 5, Velusamy in view of Raul further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive information indicative of temperatures in the geographic segment; and the weather hazard statuses are determined based at least in part on the temperatures and the operating conditions that are indicative of rain at the locations [E.g. Raul, 0018, 0026, 0044].
For claim 6, Velusamy in view of Raul further teaches wherein the information indicative of temperatures in the geographic segment is received from the plurality of vehicles [E.g. Raul, 0018, 0026, 0044].
For claim 7, Velusamy in view of Raul further teaches wherein the weather hazard statuses relate to ice hazards [E.g. Raul, 0018, 0026, 0044].
For claim 8, Velusamy in view of Raul further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to predict the ice hazards based on rain fall in the geographic segment, indicated by the operating conditions of the vehicles, and temperatures in the geographic segment [E.g. Raul, 0018, 0026, 0044].
For claim 9, Velusamy in view of Raul and Lorenz further teaches wherein the communication is configured to cause the vehicle to reduce speed [E.g. Lorenz; 0078], change a route, change a driving mode, increase a following distance to another vehicle, or change a configuration of an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), or any combination thereof.
For claim 10, Velusamy discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to predict entry of the vehicle into the geographic segment; and the communication is sent in response a prediction of the entry of the vehicle into the geographic segment [E.g. 0009, 0035-0040, 0063-0064].
For claim 11, Velusamy discloses wherein the processing device is further configured to determine a location of the vehicle being in the geographic segment; and the communication is sent in response to the location of the vehicle being determined to be in the geographic segment [E.g. 0009, 0035-0040, 0063-0064].
For claim 12, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 1.
For claim 13, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 2.
For claim 14, Velusamy discloses wherein the operating conditions are related to activation of windshield wipers of the plurality of vehicles [E.g. 0025].
Velusamy fails to expressly disclose receiving, in the computing device, information indicative of temperatures in the geographic segment; wherein the weather hazard statuses are determined based at least in part on the temperatures and the operating conditions that are indicative of rain at the locations.
However, as shown by Raul, it was well known in the art of vehicle collected weather data to include receiving, in a computing device, information indicative of temperatures in geographic segment; wherein weather hazard statuses are determined based at least in part on the temperatures and the operating conditions that are indicative of rain at the locations [E.g. 0018, 0026, 0044].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle collected weather data before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Velusamy with the teaching of Raul in order to enable vehicles to collect weather data that can affect the driving condition so that a more cautious driving can be performed when necessary and thereby improve the overall safety on the road.
For claim 15, Velusamy in view of Raul further teaches wherein the weather hazard statuses relate to ice hazards; and the method further comprises: predicting, by the computing device, the ice hazards based on rain fall in the geographic segment, indicated by the operating conditions of the vehicles, and temperatures in the geographic segment [E.g. Raul, 0018, 0026, 0044].
For claim 16, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 9.
For claim 17, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 10.
For claim 18, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 11.
For claim 19, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 1.
For claim 20, is interpreted and rejected as discussed with respect to claim 4.
Response to Remarks
6. The Applicant's remarks regarding the rejection have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
7. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED BARAKAT whose telephone number is (571)270-3696. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am-5:00PM.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached on (571) 272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 unpublished 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMED BARAKAT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689