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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Applicant Remarks U.S.C. § 103 filed on 09/23/2025 regarding U.S.C. § 103 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 8, applicant’s remark states that references Huh and Degawa fail to disclose a specific logic for how to proceed when the tollgate type is ambiguous, such as a hybrid lane supporting both electronic and cash payments.
Huh discloses identifying a general toll gate and non-stop tollgate, where a general toll gate requires a vehicle to stop for manual toll collection, and a non-stop tollgate does not require the stopping of a vehicle because of its electronic toll collection. Huh fails to specifically disclose hybrid(mixed) tollgate that supports both electronic and manual toll collection. However, new reference Sakamoto teaches identifying a mixed tollgate and assigning a target speed(speed limit) to it. (Sakamoto, page 14 line 8, ETC system is mixed in a conventional toll gate that collects fees manually. Therefore, in order to smoothly adjust the speed smoothly, it is necessary to recognize the type of toll gate and set different target speeds for ETC-equipped vehicles and ordinary vehicles (non-ETC-equipped vehicles)).
On page 8, applicant’s remark states that the references do not mention determining hybrid lane as speed- limit tollgate.
However, Sakamoto discloses after it identifies a mixed tollgate, it sets a target speed, which is similar to setting speed limit, indicating that it’s a speed limit tollgate.( Sakamoto, page 16 line 30, in a region where a plurality of types of toll gates are mixed, the type of toll gate is recognized by the travel environment recognition means, and the target speed is set according to the type of toll gate).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20220176831 A1) (hereinafter Huh) in view of Degawa (US 11077879 B2) (hereinafter Degawa) in further view of Sakamoto (JP 2006284414 A) (hereinafter Sakamoto).
Regarding claim 1. A driving assistance apparatus for assisting driving of a vehicle(Huh, paragraph 11, determining, by a controller, a target speed of an electrified vehicle based on a type of tollgate in front of the electrified vehicle), the driving assistance apparatus comprising:
a tollgate type determiner configured to determine whether or not a tollgate present in front of the vehicle is a speed-limit tollgate(Huh discloses a nonstop tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle to a target speed (speed limit). Huh also teaches general tollgate that has a target speed of zero, but it also mentions a target speed of a road as a speed limit. Hereinafter, Huh’s nonstop tollgate is assumed as non-speed limit tollgate, and general tollgate of Huh as a speed-limit tollgate. Huh, paragraph 11,determining, by a controller, a target speed of an electrified vehicle based on a type of tollgate in front of the electrified vehicle; and controlling, by the controller, a drive motor of the electrified vehicle so that the electrified vehicle performs inertia driving to be decelerated to the target speed based on the target speed of the electrified vehicle. Huh, paragraph 31, a controller 205 included in an electrified vehicle 200 may receive speed limit information of a front road on which the electrified vehicle is to travel through a navigation device 210. The navigation device 210 may receive road information, such as speed limit information of a road or tollgate information related to a road from a server. The type of tollgate received by the controller 205 through the navigation device 210 may include a general tollgate, a non-stop tollgate. Huh, paragraph 43, the controller 205 may determine whether the non-stop tollgate is located on the highway based on the information received from the navigation device 210. The non-stop tollgate may be the tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle because a Hi-pass system, which is one example of a toll collection system for collecting road tolls through wireless communication, is installed on the road),
when the navigation device indicates that the tollgate present in front of the vehicle adopts systems of both electronic toll collection and on-board device payment, the tollgate type determiner makes a determination that the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate(As disclosed above, Huh discloses a determining a nonstop tollgate that does not require deceleration of a vehicle to a target speed or speed limit, which is similar to a non-speed-limit tollgate. Furthermore, Huh teaches a Hi-pass device which is an apparatus installed in a vehicle used for toll collection that is similar to the on-board payment device of the electronic collection system. Huh, paragraph 43, the controller 205 may determine whether the non-stop tollgate is located on the highway based on the information received from the navigation device 210. The non-stop tollgate may be the tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle because a Hi-pass system, which is one example of a toll collection system for collecting road tolls through wireless communication, is installed on the road. Huh, paragraph 49, According to the operation 135, the controller 205 may determine whether a signal indicating whether the Hi-pass system is used in the electrified vehicle 200 is received from the navigation device 210 by the controller and whether a first tollgate is located on the highway ).
and a travel controller configured to control a travel speed of the vehicle in accordance with the determination by the tollgate type determiner(huh, paragraph 10, a method of controlling inertia driving of an electrified vehicle, which determines a target speed of inertia driving of a vehicle depending on a type of a tollgate that is a deceleration event in front of the vehicle.), wherein
when the determination is that the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate(Huh discloses a general tollgate which is similar to speed limit tollgate, where the vehicle can decelerate to a target speed. Huh, paragraph 48,the controller 205 may determine the target speed of the electrified vehicle 200 in the general tollgate to 0. The controller 205 may control the drive motor 220 of the electrified vehicle so that the electrified vehicle performs inertia driving to be decelerated to a target speed based on the target speed of the electrified vehicle.), the travel controller performs speed-limiting control such that, while passing through the tollgate, the vehicle has the travel speed limited not more than a speed limit for the speed-limit tollgate(Huh, paragraph 55,the controller 205 may determine the speed limit of the road of the wide tollgate as the target speed of the electrified vehicle 200 in the wide tollgate. The controller 205 may control the drive motor 220 of the electrified vehicle so that the electrified vehicle performs inertia driving to be decelerated to a target speed based on the target speed of the electrified vehicle 200.), and
when the determination is that the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate, the travel controller does not perform the speed-limiting control(As disclosed above, the non-stop tollgate of Huh is similar to non-speed limit tollgate of the present claim. When Huh determines that the highway is non-stop tollgate highway, the target speed of the vehicle will be the speed of the vehicle rather than the speed limit. Huh, paragraph 55, the controller 205 may determine a speed limit of the highway as the target speed of the electrified vehicle 200 in the non-stop tollgate. The controller 205 may control the drive motor 220 of the electrified vehicle so that the electrified vehicle 200 does not perform inertia driving based on the target speed of the electrified vehicle 200 and the speed of the electrified vehicle becomes the target speed ).
While Huh teaches about determining the type of tollgate present in front of a vehicle received from a navigation device and controlling the speed of a vehicle based on the type of tollgate, it fails to disclose determining of presence of a tollgate in front of the vehicle based on positional information of the vehicle and map information; wherein when the map information indicates that the tollgate present in front of the vehicle adopts systems of both electronic toll collection and cash payment, the tollgate type determiner makes a determination that the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate.
However, Degawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about vehicle travel control method discloses a locating tollgate based on positional information on the vehicle and map information(Huh teaches receiving tollgate type information from a navigation device, but fails to discloses toll gate information received from a map. Degawa, Col.2 line 40, The map information includes information on the positions or the like of roads, intersections, and toll booths provided on toll roads).
Therefore, 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 the teachings of Huh with Degawa’s tollgate determiner based on the vehicle’s positional information and map information. Degawa discloses locating of toll booths using map information. By using maps, it is possible to precisely locate tollgates using their exact coordinates. In addition, maps are advantageous in alerting the driver the presence of tollgate before reaching the tollgate, allowing them to prepare payment, regulate speed, or take alternative routes.
While the combination of Huh and Degawa teaches about determining the type of toll gate present in front of a vehicle based on map information, it specifically fails to disclose a system wherein when the map information indicates that the tollgate present in front of the vehicle adopts systems of both electronic toll collection and cash payment, the tollgate type determiner makes a determination that the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate.
However, Sakamoto, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about an in-vehicle information terminal, and a vehicle travel control system discloses a vehicle system wherein when the map information indicates that the tollgate present in front of the vehicle adopts systems of both electronic toll collection and cash payment, the tollgate type determiner makes a determination that the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate(Sakamoto discloses a determination of a mixed toll gate where a tollgate is both electronic and manual tollgate(MTC). Manual tollgates stop at a tollgate pay with cash or card. Furthermore, after determining a mixed tollgate, Sakamoto teaches setting a target speed, which is similar to setting speed limit, indicating that it’s a speed limit tollgate. Sakamoto, page 3 line 35, detection means for detecting or estimating the vehicle position according to map information, and a fee collection for recognizing the type of the charge collection device in front of the vehicle Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, It is also possible to change the target speed setting by recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed. Sakamoto, page 14 line 8, ETC system is mixed in a conventional toll gate that collects fees manually. Therefore, in order to smoothly adjust the speed smoothly, it is necessary to recognize the type of toll gate and set different target speeds for ETC-equipped vehicles and ordinary vehicles (non-ETC-equipped vehicles). Sakamoto, page 16 line 30, in a region where a plurality of types of toll gates are mixed, the type of toll gate is recognized by the travel environment recognition means, and the target speed is set according to the type of toll gate. The setting can be changed. Thereby, the area | region which performs automatic speed adjustment can be expanded, and a driver | operator's load can be reduced).
Therefore, 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 the teachings of Huh and Degawa with Sakamoto to identify a mixed toll gate and setting a speed limit(target speed) to the tollgate. Mixed tollgates are advantageous as they accommodate all vehicles equipped with ETC or MTC. By identifying and setting a speed limit for mixed tollgates, it is possible to have a smoother traffic flow as both ETC and MTC vehicles travel with similar speed. It further prevents accidents that might occur due to varying speeds of vehicles with different toll collection type.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20220176831 A1) (hereinafter Huh) in view of Degawa (US 11077879 B2) (hereinafter Degawa) in further view of Sakamoto (JP 2006284414 A) (hereinafter Sakamoto) in further view of Um(US 20180174371 A1)(hereinafter Um) in further view of Tomatsu(JP 2017146730 A)(hereinafter Tomatsu).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto teaches the driving assistance apparatus according to claim 1(Huh, paragraph 31, a controller; Degawa, Col.2 line 40, map information; Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed),
While the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto teaches about determining the type of tollgate present in front of a vehicle based on the positional and map information, and controlling the speed of a vehicle based on the type of tollgate, it fails to disclose an apparatus further comprising:
a remaining-distance determiner configured to determine a remaining distance between the vehicle and the tollgate, based on the positional information of the vehicle and the map information; and
a notifier configured to issue a tollgate notification indicating presence of the tollgate to an occupant of the vehicle, based on the remaining distance, wherein
when the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate, the notifier issues a first tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a first distance, and
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate, the notifier issues a second tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a second distance, wherein the
second distance is larger than the first distance.
However, Um, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about an apparatus and method for determining tollgate section discloses an apparatus further comprising:
a remaining-distance determiner configured to determine a remaining distance between the vehicle and the tollgate(Um, paragraph 18, determining a toll gate section includes determining whether a toll gate is in front of an own vehicle by use of map information that a navigation device included in the vehicle provides; comparing the remaining distance from the location of the own vehicle to the toll gate with a distance to be determined (TBD) by use of the map information.), based on the positional information of the vehicle and the map information(Um, paragraph 61, the device that determines the toll gate section compares the remaining distance from a location of the own vehicle to the toll gate with a distance to be determined (TBD) by use of the map information that the navigation device provides.); and
a notifier configured to issue a tollgate notification indicating presence of the tollgate to an occupant of the vehicle(UM, paragraph 46, When the toll gate section determining device 200 determines a current section as the toll gate section, the vehicle control device… provides notification that the vehicle is entering a toll gate section), based on the remaining distance by use of the map information that the navigation device provides(UM, paragraph 61,the device that determines the toll gate section compares the remaining distance from a location of the own vehicle to the toll gate with a distance to be determined (TBD) by use of the map information that the navigation device provides.), wherein
Therefore, 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 the teachings of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto with remaining distance estimator and notification system of Um. Um discloses determining the remaining distance between a vehicle and tollgate based on map information and a notification system that notifies the driver of the presence of a toll gate section. The determination of remaining distance allows an occupant of the vehicle to prepare for an approaching toll gate. A notification system gives the occupant an alert of an upcoming toll gate type and status.
While the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, and Um teaches about determining the type of tollgate, distance between vehicle and tollgate, and a notification system where it notifies a vehicle’s occupant the presence of tollgate, it fails to disclose a notifier where when the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate, the notifier issues a first tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a first distance and
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate, the notifier issues a second tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a second distance, wherein the second distance is larger than the first distance.
However, Tomatsu, which is in the same analogous art and that discloses a route determination device, teaches a notifier that displays the presence of tollgate at a predetermined distance before approaching a tollgate. A device where when the tollgate is the speed-limit tollgate(As discussed above, Huh can determine if a tollgate is a speed-limit tollgate, designating it as a general tollgate, where a vehicle decelerates to a target speed.), the notifier issues a first tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a first distance(The specification discloses the timing of notification is when a vehicle reaches a specified remaining distance from tollgate at which the vehicle’s occupant is notified of the presence of a toll gate. When its general tollgate as taught by Huh, a predetermined distance can be set to for example 300 in to notify the occupant the presence of a toll gate. Tomatsu, paragraph 31, When the host vehicle V approaches a position at a predetermined distance from the toll gate, the gate presentation unit 19 displays the gate selected by the gate selection unit 16 on the display panel of the HMI 7 and notifies the HMI 7 speaker by voice.), and when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate(As discussed, above Huh can determine if a tollgate is a not speed-limit tollgate, designating it as a non-stop tollgate, where a vehicle doesn’t need to decelerate to a target speed(speed limit)), the notifier issues a second tollgate notification at a timing at which the remaining distance reaches a second distance(The specification discloses the timing of notification is when a vehicle reaches a specified remaining distance from tollgate at which the vehicle’s occupant is notified of the presence of a toll gate. When its non-stop tollgate as taught by Huh, the predetermined distance can be set to for example 400 in to notify the occupant the presence of a non-speed-limit toll gate. Tomatsu, paragraph 31, When the host vehicle V approaches a position at a predetermined distance from the toll gate, the gate presentation unit 19 displays the gate selected by the gate selection unit 16 on the display panel of the HMI 7 and notifies the HMI 7 speaker by voice.), wherein the second distance is larger than the first distance(Tomatsu teaches about the predetermined distance for a notification. Therefore, it would an obvious modification to set the predetermined distance of notification of the second distance to be larger than the first distance. Tomatsu, paragraph 31).
Therefore, 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 the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, and Um by incorporating the Tomatsu’s notification system where it notifies the vehicle’s occupant the presence of toll gate according to the distance between a vehicle and a toll gate. Notifying the vehicle occupant of the presence of tollgate at a predetermined distance allows the user to better prepare for payment, selecting lane based on the cash lanes, electronic toll collection lanes. In addition, it allows the occupant to regulate speed of the vehicle based on the type of tollgate.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20220176831 A1) (hereinafter Huh) in view of Degawa (US 11077879 B2) (hereinafter Degawa) in further view of Sakamoto (JP 2006284414 A) (hereinafter Sakamoto) in further view of Um(US 20180174371 A1)(hereinafter Um) in further view of Tomatsu(JP 2017146730 A)(hereinafter Tomatsu) in further view of Iida(JP 2004355145 A)(hereinafter Iida).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, and Tomatsu teaches the driving assistance apparatus according to claim 2(Huh, paragraph 31, a controller; Degawa, Col.2 line 40, map information; Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed; Um, paragraph 18, remaining distance determiner; Tomatsu, paragraph 31, first and second distance notifier),
The combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, and Tomatsu specifically fails to disclose notification system wherein the notifier issues a notification indicating that the speed-limiting control is not to be performed, in the second tollgate notification.
However, Iida, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about vehicle controller
wherein the notifier issues a notification indicating that the speed-limiting control is not to be performed, in the second tollgate notification(Iida, paragraph 20, the speed control is released while approaching the "general" gate. , Etc., the user is notified that vehicle coordination(vehicle control) is released).
Therefore, 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 the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, and Tomatsu by incorporating the Iida’s notifier of disengagement of vehicle control. Iida teaches the controlling of a vehicle speed when it’s a not a speed limit tollgate which it designates as Electric Toll Collection System(ETC). When detecting that the tollgate is electronic without the need to decelerate/stop, it engages in vehicle control to manage the speed of the vehicle. When the tollgate is a manned/manual/general tollgate it notifies the occupant that the vehicle control has been released(disengaged) meaning vehicle control is not performed. Iida specifically does not teach the notification of speed control not being performed when the tollgate is non-speed limit tollgate/ETC (second tollgate notification). However, it would’ve been obvious to modify Iida’s first tollgate notification(speed-limit tollgate/manual tollgate), where it notifies the vehicle occupant that vehicle control is not performed, so that it notifies the disengaging of vehicle control when it’s a non-speed-limit tollgate/ETC(second tollgate notification) instead. By notifying the vehicle’s occupant, it is possible to ensure they actively control the vehicle speed rather than depending on the automatic system. In addition, the occupant can gradually decrease speed rather than experience unexpected deceleration when the system automatically disengages. Furthermore, it alerts the occupant the approaching of tollgate and prepare for payment or lane change.
Claims 4,5,and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20220176831 A1) (hereinafter Huh) in view of Degawa (US 11077879 B2) (hereinafter Degawa) in further view of Sakamoto (JP 2006284414 A) (hereinafter Sakamoto) in further view of Um(US 20180174371 A1)(hereinafter Um) in further view of Tomatsu(JP 2017146730 A)(hereinafter Tomatsu) in further view of Iida(JP 2004355145 A)(hereinafter Iida) in further view of Ito(US 20190367032 A1)(hereinafter Ito).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto teaches the driving assistance apparatus according to claim 1(Huh, paragraph 31, a controller; Degawa, Col.2 line 40, map information; Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed),
While the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto teaches about determining the type of tollgate present in front of a vehicle bases on the positional and map information, and controlling the speed of a vehicle based on the type of tollgate, it fails to disclose an apparatus further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit, based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle, wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit, the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control.
However, Ito, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about travelling control apparatus for a vehicle discloses a device further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated(Ito, paragraph 44,The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not.) from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 81, When the vehicle starts to decelerate at the current location, the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle 200 is estimated to decrease towards the deceleration target location to reach a speed limit which is the target travelling speed at the deceleration target location. This indicates the capability of Ito to determine if the preceding vehicle is decelerating towards the speed limit.), based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle(Ito, paragraph 49,The preceding vehicle information acquiring unit 22 acquires information related to the travelling state and the travelling situation of the preceding vehicle 200 based on the detection result of the sensor unit ), wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate(As discussed above, Huh discloses a nonstop tollgate that is similar to non-speed-limit tollgate, that does not require deceleration of a vehicle towards a target limit(speed limit). Huh, paragraph 43, the controller 205 may determine whether the non-stop tollgate is located on the highway based on the information received from the navigation device 210. The non-stop tollgate may be the tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle because a Hi-pass system, which is one example of a toll collection system for collecting road tolls through wireless communication, is installed on the road) and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 44, The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not. Ito, paragraph 45, the travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates a travelling speed pattern indicating a change in the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle. The travelling speed pattern can be estimated using a known technique. For example, a current travelling speed, a target travelling speed. ), the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control(Ito, paragraph 5,The travelling control unit 10 executes an engine control or a brake control to make the own vehicle 100 travel such that the travelling speed of own vehicle 100 becomes a predetermined speed set in the own vehicle 100 or a tracking speed to track the preceding vehicle).
Therefore, 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 the combination of Huh Degawa, and Sakamoto with Ito’ preceding vehicle speed determiner. After determining that the tollgate is not a speed limit toll gate as taught by Huh, it is possible to set the Ito’s predetermined speed of a vehicle to the speed limit of the toll gate and control the engine and brake of the vehicle as taught by Ito. By determining the speed of the preceding vehicle, it is possible to regulate the control of vehicle according to the speed of the preceding vehicle. This allows the vehicle to manage queue of vehicle near the tollgate and adjust speed based on the preceding vehicle.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, and Tomatsu teaches the driving assistance apparatus according to claim 2(Huh, paragraph 31, a controller; Degawa, Col.2 line 40, map information; Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed; Um, paragraph 18, remaining distance determiner; Tomatsu, paragraph 31, first and second distance notifier), further comprising
While the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um and Tomatsu teaches about determining the type of tollgate present in front of a vehicle bases on the positional and map information, and controlling the speed of a vehicle based on the type of tollgate, it fails to disclose an apparatus further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit, based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle, wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit, the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control.
However, Ito, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about travelling control apparatus for a vehicle discloses a device further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated(Ito, paragraph 44,The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not.) from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 81, When the vehicle starts to decelerate at the current location, the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle 200 is estimated to decrease towards the deceleration target location to reach a speed limit which is the target travelling speed at the deceleration target location. This indicates the capability of Ito to determine if the preceding vehicle is decelerating towards the speed limit.), based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle(Ito, paragraph 49,The preceding vehicle information acquiring unit 22 acquires information related to the travelling state and the travelling situation of the preceding vehicle 200 based on the detection result of the sensor unit ), wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate(As discussed above, Huh discloses a nonstop tollgate that is similar to non-speed-limit tollgate, that does not require deceleration of a vehicle towards a target limit(speed limit). Huh, paragraph 43, the controller 205 may determine whether the non-stop tollgate is located on the highway based on the information received from the navigation device 210. The non-stop tollgate may be the tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle because a Hi-pass system, which is one example of a toll collection system for collecting road tolls through wireless communication, is installed on the road) and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 44, The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not. Ito, paragraph 45, the travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates a travelling speed pattern indicating a change in the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle. The travelling speed pattern can be estimated using a known technique. For example, a current travelling speed, a target travelling speed. ), the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control(Ito, paragraph 5,The travelling control unit 10 executes an engine control or a brake control to make the own vehicle 100 travel such that the travelling speed of own vehicle 100 becomes a predetermined speed set in the own vehicle 100 or a tracking speed to track the preceding vehicle).
Therefore, 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 the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto with Ito’ preceding vehicle speed determiner. After determining that the tollgate is not a speed limit toll gate as taught by Huh, it is possible to set the Ito’s predetermined speed of a vehicle to the speed limit of the toll gate and control the engine and brake of the vehicle as taught by Ito. By determining the speed of the preceding vehicle, it is possible to regulate the control of vehicle according to the speed of the preceding vehicle. This allows the vehicle to manage queue of vehicle near the tollgate and adjust speed based on the preceding vehicle.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, Tomatsu, and Iida teaches the driving assistance apparatus according to claim 3(Huh, paragraph 31, a controller; Degawa, Col.2 line 40, map information; Sakamoto, page 6 line 28, recognizing toll gate information in a place where multiple types of toll gates are mixed; Um, paragraph 18, remaining distance determiner; Tomatsu, paragraph 31, first and second distance notifier; Iida, paragraph 20, speed control release notifier),
While the combination of Huh, Degawa, Sakamoto, Um, Tomatsu, Iida teaches about determining the type of tollgate present in front of a vehicle bases on the positional and map information, and controlling the speed of a vehicle based on the type of tollgate, it fails to disclose an apparatus further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit, based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle, wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit, the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control.
However, Ito, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about travelling control apparatus for a vehicle discloses a device further comprising
a preceding-vehicle speed determiner configured to determine, whether or not a preceding vehicle traveling to the tollgate has decelerated(Ito, paragraph 44,The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not.) from a speed larger than the speed limit to a speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 81, When the vehicle starts to decelerate at the current location, the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle 200 is estimated to decrease towards the deceleration target location to reach a speed limit which is the target travelling speed at the deceleration target location. This indicates the capability of Ito to determine if the preceding vehicle is decelerating towards the speed limit.), based on a result of detection by a front sensor of the vehicle(Ito, paragraph 49,The preceding vehicle information acquiring unit 22 acquires information related to the travelling state and the travelling situation of the preceding vehicle 200 based on the detection result of the sensor unit ), wherein
when the tollgate is not the speed-limit tollgate(As discussed above, Huh discloses a nonstop tollgate that is similar to non-speed-limit tollgate, that does not require deceleration of a vehicle towards a target limit(speed limit). Huh, paragraph 43, the controller 205 may determine whether the non-stop tollgate is located on the highway based on the information received from the navigation device 210. The non-stop tollgate may be the tollgate that does not require deceleration of the vehicle because a Hi-pass system, which is one example of a toll collection system for collecting road tolls through wireless communication, is installed on the road) and the preceding vehicle has decelerated to the speed not more than the speed limit(Ito, paragraph 44, The travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates whether the preceding vehicle 200 decelerates or not. Ito, paragraph 45, the travelling speed estimation ECU 60 estimates a travelling speed pattern indicating a change in the travelling speed of the preceding vehicle. The travelling speed pattern can be estimated using a known technique. For example, a current travelling speed, a target travelling speed. ), the travel controller performs the speed-limiting control(Ito, paragraph 5,The travelling control unit 10 executes an engine control or a brake control to make the own vehicle 100 travel such that the travelling speed of own vehicle 100 becomes a predetermined speed set in the own vehicle 100 or a tracking speed to track the preceding vehicle).
Therefore, 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 the combination of Huh, Degawa, and Sakamoto with Ito’ preceding vehicle speed determiner. After determining that the tollgate is not a speed limit toll gate as taught by Huh, it is possible to set the Ito’s predetermined speed of a vehicle to the speed limit of the toll gate and control the engine and brake of the vehicle as taught by Ito. By determining the speed of the preceding vehicle, it is possible to regulate the control of vehicle according to the speed of the preceding vehicle. This allows the vehicle to manage queue of vehicle near the tollgate and adjust speed based on the preceding vehicle.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure
Yamaguchi(JP-2020147089-A) discloses a correlation unit that is composed of a road calculation unit and a passage determination unit with map information. That includes determining a road shape and a traveling direction, and can calculate the distance from the vehicle to the ETC tollgate
Wang(WO-2022227986-A1) teaches about obtaining speed limit information of current road from the server based on the current position, and determining whether the speed of the preceding vehicle is lower than the minimum speed limit value.
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 BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 5712727298. 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.
/BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665