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
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicants argued that the prior art, i.e., JUNG, on record failed to teach or suggest some of the claimed features, e.g., "determine, during the control driving of the host vehicle, whether a predefined condition is satisfied…determine, based on the predefined condition being satisfied, situation information about at least one target control item related to the predefined condition, by using the sensor device…wherein the predefined condition is satisfied based on the host vehicle entering a speed enforcement section or based on a change in a road type ahead along a driving route…”. The examiner would like to steer the applicants’ to the following that “Applicant(s) are reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claim. The Examiner is not limited to Applicant's definition, which is not specifically set forth in the claims, In re Tanaka et al, 193 USPQ 139, (CCPA) 1977.
One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).”.
Concerning the claimed subject matter “…determine, during the control driving of the host vehicle, whether a predefined condition is satisfied…”, JUNG clearly teaches “…controlling autonomous driving in a device for controlling the autonomous driving includes collecting state recognition information during travel, receiving information on a driver-requested automation level, determining a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information, comparing the driver-requested automation level with the currently applicable maximum automation level to determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation level downward compared to the driver-requested automation level to perform the autonomous driving when the automation level downward adjustment is required as the result of the determination…the state recognition information may include at least one of external environment recognition information, travel state recognition information, driver state recognition information, precise map information, and/or vehicle operation state information…External environment recognition information may include line recognition state information, current travel road type information, current travel road traffic volume information, current travel road accident and construction information, current weather information, communication state information, and the like…”.
Concerning the claimed subject matter “…determine, based on the predefined condition being satisfied, situation information about at least one target control item related to the predefined condition, by using the sensor device …”, JUNG clearly teaches “…controlling autonomous driving in a device for controlling the autonomous driving includes collecting state recognition information during travel, receiving information on a driver-requested automation level, determining a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information, comparing the driver-requested automation level with the currently applicable maximum automation level to determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation level downward compared to the driver-requested automation level to perform the autonomous driving when the automation level downward adjustment is required as the result of the determination…the state recognition information may include at least one of external environment recognition information, travel state recognition information, driver state recognition information, precise map information, and/or vehicle operation state information…External environment recognition information may include line recognition state information, current travel road type information, current travel road traffic volume information, current travel road accident and construction information, current weather information, communication state information, and the like…”.
Concerning the claimed subject matter “…wherein the predefined condition is satisfied based on the host vehicle entering a speed enforcement section or based on a change in a road type ahead along a driving route …”, JUNG clearly teaches “…controlling autonomous driving in a device for controlling the autonomous driving includes collecting state recognition information during travel, receiving information on a driver-requested automation level, determining a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information, comparing the driver-requested automation level with the currently applicable maximum automation level to determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation level downward compared to the driver-requested automation level to perform the autonomous driving when the automation level downward adjustment is required as the result of the determination…the state recognition information may include at least one of external environment recognition information, travel state recognition information, driver state recognition information, precise map information, and/or vehicle operation state information…External environment recognition information may include line recognition state information, current travel road type information, current travel road traffic volume information, current travel road accident and construction information, current weather information, communication state information, and the like…”, as taught in Abstract, ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890).
Therefore, it is clear that based on the state recognition information, certain automation levels are performed, e.g., maximum automation level to determine whether automation level upward and/or downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation levels upward and/or downward to perform the autonomous driving when it is determined that the automation level upward and/or downward adjustment is required clearly teaching the above claimed subject matter. Hence, the previous rejection is maintained with elucidations to clarify examiner’s position.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 10-11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JUNG.
Consider claims 1, 11:
JUNG teaches an autonomous driving control method (e.g., “…A method…for controlling autonomous driving in an autonomous driving vehicle…”, of Abstract, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S470, S510-S570), an autonomous driving control apparatus (e.g., “…a device for controlling autonomous driving in an autonomous driving vehicle…”, of Abstract, Figs. 2-3 elements 200-250, 300-330), the apparatus comprising: a sensor device (e.g., a camera/a radar/a lidar of Fig. 3 elements 302-304); a notification device (e.g., a warning alarming device 321, a human machine interface (HMI), of Fig. 3 elements 321-322); a memory configured to store instructions (e.g., an autonomous driving controller 200 comprising a memory of Fig. 2 element 200); and a control device operatively connected to the sensor device, the notification device, and the memory (e.g., an autonomous driving controller of Figs. 2-3 elements 200-250, 310-315, 321-322), wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device (e.g., an autonomous driving controller 200 comprising a memory of Fig. 2 element 200), cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: control driving of a host vehicle (See JUNG, e.g., “…adjust the automation level downward to the currently applicable maximum automation level to perform the autonomous driving…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890); determine (e.g., “…adjust the automation level downward…the automation level to be adjusted upward…”, therefore, determining, of Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570); determine, during the control driving of the host vehicle, whether a predefined condition (e.g., the collected state recognition information of Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) is satisfied (See JUNG, e.g., “…determine the currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890); determine (e.g., “…determine the currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…”, therefore, determine, of Fig. 4 steps S430-S470), based on the predefined condition being satisfied, situation information about at least one target control item (e.g., the state recognition information of Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S470, S510-S570) related to the predefined condition, by using the sensor device (See JUNG, e.g., “…collect state recognition information such as external environment information, vehicle travel state information, vehicle operation state information, and the like during the travel...”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890); determine (e.g., “…adjust the automation level downward…the automation level to be adjusted upward…”, therefore, determining, of Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570) whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on the situation information (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…determine whether the upward adjustment to the driver-requested automation level is possible…display a predetermined guide message indicating that the level upward adjustment to the driver-requested automation level is possible on the screen…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0158]-¶ [0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) or whether an advance warning regarding the situation information is required (See JUNG, e.g., “…When the control right transfer is required as a result of the determination…transmit a predetermined control signal to the warning alarming device 321 to control a predetermined warning alarm message requesting the control right transfer to the driver to be output…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890); and provide, based on a determination that the at least one target control item is incapable of being performed (See JUNG, e.g., “…determine the currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…compare the currently applicable maximum automation level with the driver-requested automation level…adjust the automation level downward to the currently applicable maximum automation level to perform the autonomous driving…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) or that the advance warning regarding the situation information is required (See JUNG, e.g., “…transmit a predetermined control signal to the warning alarming device 321 to control a predetermined warning alarm message requesting the control right transfer to the driver to be output…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890), at least one notification to a user by using the notification device (See JUNG, e.g., “…when level downward adjustment to an automation level 1 610 is required…configure a first screen 615 including a guide phrase “Because conditions to activate automatic driving to the requested automation level 2 are not met, only vertical (lateral) direction control will be performed. Would you like to operate the vertical (lateral) direction control?”… Because conditions to activate automatic driving to the requested automation level 3 are not met, the vehicle will operate in the automation level 2. Would you like to operate the automation level 2?”…”, of ¶ [0121], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890), wherein the predefined condition is satisfied based on the host vehicle entering a speed enforcement section or based on a change in a road type ahead along a driving route (See JUNG, e.g., “…controlling autonomous driving in a device for controlling the autonomous driving includes collecting state recognition information during travel…the state recognition information may include at least one of external environment recognition information, travel state recognition information, driver state recognition information, precise map information, and/or vehicle operation state information…External environment recognition information may include line recognition state information, current travel road type information, current travel road traffic volume information, current travel road accident and construction information, current weather information, communication state information, and the like…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890).
Consider claim 3:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: while controlling driving of the host vehicle, based on a determination that longitudinal speed control is required (e.g., “…the precise positioning device 311 may identify state information—for example, a gradient, a road type, the number of lines, a speed limit, and the like—of a travel road of the host vehicle…”, therefore, the speed control is required for the system to implement the automation levels either upward or downward, of ¶ [014]-¶ [0106], Fig. 3 elements 311-329), identify the situation information about the at least one target control item including the longitudinal speed control (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890).
Consider claims 10, 20:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 1, 11. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: provide the user with the at least one notification including at least one of visual content, auditory content, a haptic function, or a combination of the visual content, the auditory content, and the haptic function by using the notification device (See JUNG, e.g., “…when level downward adjustment to an automation level 1 610 is required…configure a first screen 615 including a guide phrase “Because conditions to activate automatic driving to the requested automation level 2 are not met, only vertical (lateral) direction control will be performed. Would you like to operate the vertical (lateral) direction control?”…Would you like to operate the automation level 2?”…”, of ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Fig. 6 elements 610-640).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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(s) 2, 4-9, 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG in view of Lewandowski.
Consider claim 2:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: determine whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on currently applicable maximum automation level (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890). However, JUNG does not explicitly teach determine whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on navigation-based smart cruise control (NSCC).
In an analogous field of endeavor, Lewandowski teaches determine whether the at least one target control item (e.g., implementing the ADC, XAR controls of Fig. 5 steps 500-514) is capable of being performed based on navigation-based smart cruise control (NSCC) (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…determine, as a vehicle travels along a roadway while an adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle is active, that the roadway is a non-controlled-access roadway, detect a presence of traffic congestion impeding travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway…generate a prompt for driver input indicating whether the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter an extended auto-resume (XAR) mode, and cause the adaptive cruise control feature to enter the XAR mode based on driver input indicating that the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter the XAR mode…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0008], ¶ [0009], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine “…collecting state recognition information during travel, receiving information on a driver-requested automation level, determining a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information, comparing the driver-requested automation level with the currently applicable maximum automation level to determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation level downward to perform the autonomous driving when it is determined that the automation level downward adjustment is required…”, as disclosed in JUNG with “determine whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on navigation-based smart cruise control (NSCC)”, as taught in Lewandowski with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for robustly, seamlessly, and efficiently mitigating and avoiding circumstances such as highly variable traffic conditions by making use of the adaptive cruise control features.
Consider claims 4, 14:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 1, 11. In addition, JUNG teaches “…collecting state recognition information during travel, receiving information on a driver-requested automation level, determining a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information, comparing the driver-requested automation level with the currently applicable maximum automation level to determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required, and adjusting an automation level downward to perform the autonomous driving when it is determined that the automation level downward adjustment is required…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890). JUNG further teaches a multiple of notification to the driver as exhibited in Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890. However, JUNG does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: based on a determination that the host vehicle is driving in a speed enforcement section, identify the situation information including at least one of a starting point and an endpoint of the speed enforcement section, a real-time location of the host vehicle, a lowest target speed of the host vehicle through NSCC control, combination of the starting point and the endpoint of the speed enforcement section, the real-time location of the host vehicle, and the lowest target speed of the host vehicle through the NSCC control; determine whether NSCC-based control is possible such that a driving speed of the host vehicle at the endpoint is less than a speed limit of the speed enforcement section, based on the situation information; and based on determination that the NSCC-based control is impossible, provide a first notification to the user by using the notification device, based on a determination that the NSCC-based control is impossible, provide a first notification to the user by using the notification device, wherein the first notification includes at least one of locations of the starting point and the endpoint of the speed enforcement section, the real-time location of the host vehicle, areal-time driving speed of the host vehicle, the speed limit, or a guide on a transition of control authority for the host vehicle.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Lewandowski teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: based on a determination that the host vehicle is driving in a speed enforcement section (e.g., “…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 by analyzing vehicle speed data 420. Vehicle speed data 420 is data indicating the speed of vehicle 105 as of each of a series/set of points in time…” of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), identify the situation information (e.g., “…The speed change count indicates a number of decelerations and accelerations performed by vehicle 105 over the course of the time interval…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 based on a comparison of the speed change count with a threshold value…” of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514) including at least one of a starting point and an endpoint of the speed enforcement section (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), a real-time location of the host vehicle (e.g., “…identify a location of vehicle 105 based on geolocation data 416 (e.g., GPS coordinates) for vehicle 105, consult navigation data 418 to identify non-controlled-access roadway 401 as the roadway being traveled by vehicle 105 based on the geolocation of vehicle 105, and determine that non-controlled-access roadway 401 is a non-controlled-access roadway based on electronic horizon data 414…”, of Fig. 4 elements 105-422), a lowest target speed of the host vehicle through NSCC control, combination of the starting point and the endpoint of the speed enforcement section (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), the real-time location of the host vehicle, and the lowest target speed of the host vehicle through the NSCC control (e.g., “…The speed change count indicates a number of decelerations and accelerations performed by vehicle 105 over the course of the time interval…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 based on a comparison of the speed change count with a threshold value…”, of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514); determine whether NSCC-based control is possible such that a driving speed of the host vehicle at the endpoint is less than a speed limit of the speed enforcement section, based on the situation information (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514); and based on determination that the control is impossible, provide a first notification to the user by using the notification device (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…generate a prompt for driver input indicating whether the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter an extended auto-resume (XAR) mode, and cause the adaptive cruise control feature to enter the XAR mode based on driver input indicating that the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), wherein the first notification includes at least one of locations of the starting point and the endpoint of the speed enforcement section, the real-time location of the host vehicle, areal-time driving speed of the host vehicle, the speed limit, or a guide on a transition of control authority for the host vehicle (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for robustly, seamlessly, and efficiently mitigating and avoiding collisions with the implementation of a multiple of the adaptive cruise control features.
Consider claims 5, 15:
The combination of JUNG, Lewandowski teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 4, 14. Lewandowski teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: determine the speed limit of the speed enforcement section (e.g., “…The speed change count indicates a number of decelerations and accelerations performed by vehicle 105 over the course of the time interval…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 based on a comparison of the speed change count with a threshold value…”, of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514); and identify a speed corresponding to a specified ratio of the speed limit as the lowest target speed of the host vehicle (e.g., “…determine an average speed of the vehicle over a time interval based on the vehicle speed data and detect the presence of the traffic congestion based on a comparison of the average speed with a threshold speed…”, of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for robustly, seamlessly, and expeditiously determining the external environment of the vehicle to implement the functionalities of the adaptive cruise control in an appropriate fashion, thereby, rendering the autonomous ride enjoyable.
Consider claims 6, 16:
The combination of JUNG, Lewandowski teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 4, 14. In addition, JUNG teaches a multiple of notification to the driver as exhibited in Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890. Lewandowski teaches and wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to transfer control authority of the host vehicle to the user (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for robustly, seamlessly, and efficiently mitigating and avoiding collisions with the implementation of a multiple of the adaptive cruise control features.
Consider claims 7, 17:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 1, 11. JUNG further teaches a multiple of notification to the driver as exhibited in Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890. In an analogous field of endeavor, Lewandowski teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: determine a first road type (e.g., the external environment information indicating the road condition prior to the vehicle entering the XAR mode, and terminating the XAR mode based on the absence of the congestion, as exhibited in Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514) of a driving road on which the host vehicle is driving (e.g., “…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 by analyzing vehicle speed data 420. Vehicle speed data 420 is data indicating the speed of vehicle 105 as of each of a series/set of points in time…” of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514); and based on a determination that a second road type of a front road (e.g., the road after the termination of the XAR mode based on the passage of the congested area of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514) placed within a specified distance from a real-time location of the host vehicle is different from the first road type of the driving road (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), provide a second notification to the user by using the notification device (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…generate a prompt for driver input indicating whether the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter an extended auto-resume (XAR) mode, and cause the adaptive cruise control feature to enter the XAR mode based on driver input indicating that the adaptive cruise control feature is to enter the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for efficiently appraising the operator of the vehicle of the current external environment information.
Consider claims 8, 18:
The combination of JUNG, Lewandowski teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 7, 17. Lewandowski teaches wherein the second notification includes at least one of the first road type of the driving road, the specified distance (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), a real-time distance remaining until the first road type is changed, the second road type of the front road, a real-time location of the host vehicle (e.g., “…identify a location of vehicle 105 based on geolocation data 416 (e.g., GPS coordinates) for vehicle 105, consult navigation data 418 to identify non-controlled-access roadway 401 as the roadway being traveled by vehicle 105 based on the geolocation of vehicle 105, and determine that non-controlled-access roadway 401 is a non-controlled-access roadway based on electronic horizon data 414…”, of Fig. 4 elements 105-422), a real-time driving speed of the host vehicle, the speed limit (e.g., “…The speed change count indicates a number of decelerations and accelerations performed by vehicle 105 over the course of the time interval…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 based on a comparison of the speed change count with a threshold value…”, of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), a guide on a transition of control authority for the host vehicle, or a combination of the first road type of the driving road, the specified distance, the real-time distance remaining until the first road type is changed, the second road type of the front road (e.g., the external environment information indicating the road condition prior to the vehicle entering the XAR mode, and terminating the XAR mode based on the absence of the congestion, as exhibited in Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514), the real-time location of the host vehicle, the real-time driving speed of the host vehicle, and the guide on the transition of control authority for the host vehicle (e.g., “…The speed change count indicates a number of decelerations and accelerations performed by vehicle 105 over the course of the time interval…detect the presence of traffic congestion 404 based on a comparison of the speed change count with a threshold value…”, of Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for robustly, seamlessly, and efficiently mitigating and avoiding collisions with the implementation of a multiple of the adaptive cruise control features.
Consider claims 9, 19:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 1, 11. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the autonomous driving control apparatus to: based on a determination that the at least one target control item is incapable of being performed (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) or the advance warning regarding the situation information is required (See JUNG, e.g., “…transmit a predetermined control signal to the warning alarming device 321 to control a predetermined warning alarm message requesting the control right transfer to the driver to be output…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890), determine whether control based on the currently applicable maximum automation level is being performed on the host vehicle (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890); and when it is identified that the control is being performed, provide the at least one notification to the user by using the notification device (See JUNG, e.g., “…when level downward adjustment to an automation level 1 610 is required…configure a first screen 615 including a guide phrase “Because conditions to activate automatic driving to the requested automation level 2 are not met, only vertical (lateral) direction control will be performed. Would you like to operate the vertical (lateral) direction control?”… Because conditions to activate automatic driving to the requested automation level 3 are not met, the vehicle will operate in the automation level 2. Would you like to operate the automation level 2?”…”, of ¶ [0121], ¶ [0144]-¶ [0154], ¶ [0158]-[0164], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890). Lewandowski teaches NSCC (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for efficiently appraising the operator of the vehicle of the current external environment information.
Consider claim 12:
JUNG teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 11. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein determining whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on the situation information (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) or whether the advance warning regarding the situation information is required (See JUNG, e.g., “…transmit a predetermined control signal to the warning alarming device 321 to control a predetermined warning alarm message requesting the control right transfer to the driver to be output…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0121], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890) further includes: determining, by the control device, whether the at least one target control item is capable of being performed based on the currently applicable maximum automation level (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890). Lewandowski teaches NSCC (See Lewandowski, e.g., “…the adaptive cruise control feature of the vehicle can be caused to enter the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to enter the XAR mode…an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of the vehicle along the non-controlled-access roadway can be detected (e.g., because the vehicle has passed beyond the congested area, has exited the non-controlled-access roadway, etc.)…once vehicle 105 has passed through traffic congestion 404…detect an absence of traffic congestion impeding the travel of vehicle 105 along non-controlled-access roadway 401…caused to exit the XAR mode…cause the adaptive cruise control feature of vehicle 105 to exit the XAR mode…”, of ¶ [0053]-¶ [0054], ¶ [0057]-¶ [0066], ¶ [0068]-¶ [0069], and Fig. 1 elements 100-145, Fig. 3 elements 105-302, Fig. 4 elements 105-422, Fig. 5 steps 500-514). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify JUNG with the teachings of Lewandowski so as to with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for efficiently appraising the operator of the vehicle of the current external environment information.
Consider claim 13:
The combination of JUNG, Lewandowski teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, JUNG teaches wherein identifying the situation information about the at least one target control item for the host vehicle by using the sensor device (e.g., the state recognition information of Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S470, S510-S570) further includes: while controlling driving of the host vehicle, when it is identified that longitudinal speed control required (e.g., “…the precise positioning device 311 may identify state information—for example, a gradient, a road type, the number of lines, a speed limit, and the like—of a travel road of the host vehicle…”, therefore, the speed control is required for the system to implement the automation levels either upward or downward, of ¶ [014]-¶ [0106], Fig. 3 elements 311-329), identifying, by the control device, the situation information about the at least one target control item including the longitudinal speed control (See JUNG, e.g., “…determines a currently applicable maximum automation level based on the collected state recognition information…determine whether automation level downward adjustment is required...determining whether automation level upward adjustment is possible based on the state recognition information during the autonomous driving at the downwardly adjusted automation level…”, of ¶ [0014], ¶ [0019], ¶ [0023]-¶ [0024], ¶ [0033], ¶ [0058], ¶ [0064], ¶ [0170]-¶ [0172], Figs. 2-3 elements 200-330, Figs. 4-5 steps S410-S570, Fig. 6 elements 610-640, and Fig. 8 steps S810-S890).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hu et al. (US Pub. No.: 2023/0365127 A1) teaches “A method for preventing a subject vehicle from driving into a vehicle ahead includes equipping the subject vehicle with at least one brake system, a drive system and a driver assistance system with an emergency braking function. The method also includes issuing a haptic warning when the subject vehicle enters a distance warning zone, applying emergency braking on entering an emergency braking zone, and calculating a relative speed between the subject vehicle and the vehicle ahead. The method includes continuously calculating a time to collision (TTC) when approaching the vehicle ahead, specifying a first TTC threshold value for adaptive classification of a distance from the subject vehicle to the vehicle ahead, checking, when approaching the vehicle ahead, whether the TTC falls below the first TTC threshold value, and, if the TTC falls below the first TTC threshold value, issuing a haptic warning to a driver of the vehicle.”
OZAKI et al. (US Pub. No.: 2022/0227387 A1) teaches “A vehicle control device includes a processor, a memory and a sensor that acquires surrounding environment information of the vehicle, a host vehicle position estimation unit that estimates the route of the vehicle, a surrounding environment storage unit that stores the surrounding environment information and the route estimated by the host vehicle position estimation unit in association with each other, a vehicle-speed threshold determination unit that sets a vehicle-speed threshold value when the surrounding environment storage unit stores the surrounding environment information and the route in association with each other, and determines whether or not a current vehicle speed exceeds the vehicle-speed threshold value when the surrounding environment storage unit stores the surrounding environment information and the route, and a warning unit that performs a notification of an excess of the vehicle speed when the vehicle-speed threshold determination unit determines that the vehicle speed exceeds the vehicle-speed threshold value.”
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABAR SARWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5584. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 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, Faris S. Almatrahi can be reached on (313)446-4821. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/BABAR SARWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights