DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
2. Claims 1-2, 5-11, and 14-17 are pending in Instant Application.
3. Claims 3-4 and 12-13 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
4. Regarding Drawing Objections: Applicant’s revised drawings have overcome the objections raised in the previous action; therefore, the drawing objection is hereby withdrawn.
5. Regarding 112a/112b Rejections: Applicant’s revised drawings and amendments have overcome the rejections raised in the previous action; therefore, the 112a rejection is hereby withdrawn.
6. Regarding 103 rejection: Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Xu adjusts the platoon, not the traffic signal as what was amended in claims 1 and 10. Examiner would like to point to paragraphs [0007, 0016] in Cross where it states that platoon of vehicles are able to coordinate with systems to set up a cascade in sequence by allowing the platoon of vehicles to proceed through a continuous series of lights. Therefore, this indicates that Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross does teach the capability of the amended claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“positioning device” in claims 1 and 9
“environment sensing device” in claims 1 and 9
“communication device” in claims 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15
“roadside device” in claim 9
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The following are the interpreted corresponding structures found within the specification for some of the above limitations:
“positioning device” – GPS, [0032]
“environment sensing device” – camera, radar [0033]
“communication device” – V2V system [0032]
“roadside device” – road side unit (RSU) [0032]
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, 8-12, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 20190250639) in view of Matsumoto (US 20210041893) in further view of Cross (US 20200112973).
Regarding Claim 1, Xu discloses A vehicle platoon intersection decision-making system, comprising: (Xu, see at least Abstract, “A vehicle platoon control system performs techniques for controlling a platoon of vehicles through an intersection”)
a vehicle platoon, comprising multiple vehicles arranged in order, (Xu, see at least Fig. 5 in which shows a vehicle platoon comprising multiple vehicles arranged in order) the vehicles including a captain vehicle and multiple member vehicles traveling according to a current speed command; (Xu, see at least [0024] “A vehicle platoon system may have one lead vehicle. The lead vehicle may transmit commands to other vehicles in the platoon. The lead vehicle may travel at the beginning or head of the pattern of the platoon. The lead vehicle is followed by a series of vehicles (e.g., follower vehicles) that may closely maintain the speed, distance, and maneuvers of the lead vehicle.”)
each vehicle respectively comprising: a communication device; (Xu, see at least [0093] “A connected vehicle includes a communication device”)
wherein the communication devices of the vehicles are communicatively connected to each other; (Xu, see at least Fig. 3 and [0055] wherein communication occurs between the vehicles and/or mobile device and the server through the network 127. Also see [0058] in which discloses commands to vehicles are broadcasted using V2V communication.)
a positioning device, generating an absolute position information and a relative position information; (Xu, see at least [0036] wherein each vehicle 124 and/or mobile device 122 may include position circuitry such as one or more processors or circuits for receiving GNSS signals and comparing the GNSS signals to a clock to determine the absolute or relative position of the vehicle 124 and/or mobile device 122.)
an environment sensing device, generating an environment status information; (Xu, see at least [0093] wherein a connected vehicle includes a communication device and an environment sensor array for reporting the surroundings of the vehicle 124 to the server 125.)
a computing device, connected to the communication device to communicate with the other vehicles, connected to the positioning device to receive the absolute position information and the relative position information, and connected to the environment sensing device to receive the environment status information; (Xu, see at least [0058], wherein server 125 and the intersection controller 30 communication with the ECU of the vehicles. Also see at least Fig. 2 and also see [0036-0037] and [0056] wherein the location data (absolute or relative position of the vehicle) from at least one (and up to all) vehicles in the platoon is being received by the server 125. And also see at least [0093] wherein a connected vehicle includes a communication device and an environment sensor array for reporting the surroundings of the vehicle to the server 125.)
the captain computing device executes an intersection decision-making process, determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through an intersection with the current speed command according to an intersection signal information and an intersection distance information in the environment status information, the relative position information of each vehicle, the absolute position information of the captain vehicle, and the current speed command; (Xu, see at least Fig. 4 and [0336-0037] wherein the server 125 receives the location data from at least one and up to all the vehicles within the platoon, wherein each vehicle may include position circuitry to determine the absolute or relative position of the vehicle. The absolute or relative position may be stored as location data. Also see [0072] wherein the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection, the distance between the location data detected and the geographic location of the intersection. The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed or based on traffic data. And also see [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. At act S115, the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is apart of the server 125.)
if yes, the captain computing device controls the vehicles to maintain traveling with the current speed command, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is apart of the server 125.)
and if no, the captain computing device generates a first optimized speed control information through a first speed decision process, transmits the first optimized speed control information to the other vehicles through the communication device, (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.) controlling the vehicle platoon to decelerates before reaching the intersection until an acceleration critical time point, and begins to accelerate, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0080] wherein if the traffic data indicates that the road traffic condition is greater than a threshold, the lead vehicle in the vehicle platoon system notifies other vehicles that the vehicle platoon system will deaccelerate and wait at the intersection till the next green phase comes. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may notify the other vehicles directly. Also see at least [0103-0104] wherein the processor 300 determines platoon data for a vehicle platoon traveling toward the intersection, data indicative of the position and/or speed of the vehicle platoon. Estimated arrival time for the platoon at the intersection is compared to intersection data to determine whether an adjustment to the platoon should be made. **after the determination of the platoon cannot safety pass the intersection and the speed is adjusted (decreased), when the next green phase comes, intersection controller 30 would determine if it is safe to pass the intersection and generate commands to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distances to efficiently pass the intersection, see Fig. 4.)
wherein when the captain computing device determines that the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection with the current speed command, the captain computing device further determines whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the intersection signal according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, and the intersection signal information; (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.)
if yes, the captain computing device performs a coordinate communication with the traffic signal, and generates a second optimized speed control information through a second speed decision process, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. *** if it’s determined that the platoon of vehicles can safely pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon system will accelerate and drive through the intersection. The acceleration above the current speed is interpreted as second speed decision process.)
and if not, the captain computing device then generates a first optimized speed control information, and transmits the first optimized speed control information to the other vehicles through the communication device, controlling the vehicle platoon to travel with deceleration before reaching the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0080] wherein if the traffic data indicates that the road traffic condition is greater than a threshold, the lead vehicle in the vehicle platoon system notifies other vehicles that the vehicle platoon system will deaccelerate and wait at the intersection till the next green phase comes. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may notify the other vehicles directly. Also see at least [0103-0104] wherein the processor 300 determines platoon data for a vehicle platoon traveling toward the intersection, data indicative of the position and/or speed of the vehicle platoon. Estimated arrival time for the platoon at the intersection is compared to intersection data to determine whether an adjustment to the platoon should be made. **after the determination of the platoon cannot safety pass the intersection and the speed is adjusted (decreased), when the next green phase comes, intersection controller 30 would determine if it is safe to pass the intersection and generate commands to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distances to efficiently pass the intersection, see Fig. 4.)
wherein when the captain computing device determines whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the intersection signal, the captain computing device calculates a passing time of a rearmost vehicle according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, and determines whether the passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than a sum of the remaining passing time of the intersection signal and a preset extending time; (Xu, see at least [0073] wherein the time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection. Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass.)
if yes, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the intersection signal; (Xu, see at least [0078] the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is a part of the server 125.)
when the captain computing device performs a coordinate communication with the traffic signal, the captain device transmits a request to the intersection signal to extend the remaining passing time by the preset extending time; and if not, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the intersection signal. (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.)
Xu does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing device of the captain vehicle is defined as a captain computing device,
However, Matsumoto discloses wherein the computing device of the captain vehicle is defined as a captain computing device, (Matsumoto, see at least [0014] wherein the leading vehicle comprises a management device.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the technique of utilizing the leading vehicle as a management device as taught by Matsumoto in which would then allow for a leading vehicle within the vehicle platoon to determine if the vehicles within the platoon can cross an intersection together without splitting off. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Modified Xu does not explicitly disclose a preset extended time
However, Cross discloses a preset extended time (Cross, see at least [0015-0016] wherein the light signals can increase a time period so that the green signal is given at a longer time)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the capability of a increasing the time period for a green signal as taught by Cross in which would improve the platoon’s ability to cross over the intersection, as the increasing of time for a green signal would allow for a platoon of vehicles to cross over simultaneously. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Regarding Claim 2, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making system as claimed in claim 1, (see rejection above)
wherein when the captain computing device determines whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command, (Xu, see at least [0076-0077] wherein the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection..The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed of the vehicle 124 or may be based on the traffic data.) the captain computing device first determines whether the signal status of the traffic signal is at a passing status according to the intersection signal information; (Xu, see at least [0076-0077] wherein the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection..The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed of the vehicle 124 or may be based on the traffic data.)
if the signal status of the traffic signal is at the passing status, the captain computing device calculates the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle in the vehicles according to the intersection distance information, (Xu, see at least [0073] wherein time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection. ** Fig. 5 showcases S101 wherein traffic data and SPaT and MAP data is received before a time to pass the intersection is calculated.) the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, (Xu, see at least [0072] wherein the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection. The distance (e.g., distance A in FIG. 5) may be the arithmetic or geometric distance between the location data detected at the vehicle 124 and the geographic location of the intersection. The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed of the vehicle 124 or may be based on the traffic data.”) and determines whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than the remaining passing time of the traffic signal; (Xu, see at least [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass.)
if the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than the remaining passing time, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command; (Xu, see at least [0073] wherein time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection. Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety.)
if the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is not smaller than the remaining passing time, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection with the current speed command; (Xu, see at least [0073] wherein time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection. Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass.)
if the signal status of the traffic signal is at a non-passing status, the captain computing device first calculates the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle in the vehicles according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, determines whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is larger than a remaining non-passing time of the intersection signal;
and determines whether the traffic passing time of the rearmost vehicle minus the remaining non-passing time is smaller than a passing time of the traffic signal; and if both are true, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command. (Xu, see at least [0073], and see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** data collected showcases the lighting data and a determination can be made of a non-passing status (red or even a yellow light) and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety based on the timing of the lighting. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass. If the time of the phase change is larger than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is able to pass.)
Regarding Claim 5, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the captain computing device executes the intersection decision-making process, (see rejection above)
if not, the captain computing device then determines whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command. (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. ***)
Xu does not explicitly disclose the computing devices of the vehicles determine whether a cut-in situation by an external vehicle occurs;
However, Matsumoto discloses the computing devices of the vehicles determine whether a cut-in situation by an external vehicle occurs; (Matsumoto, see at least [0118] wherein a cut-in by a vehicle traveling behind can be prevented)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the capability of a determining if a cut-in situation is occurring as taught by Matsumoto in which would then allow for a vehicle platoon to utilize this data to determine if the vehicles within the platoon can cross an intersection together without splitting off. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Regarding Claim 8, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second speed decision process includes: (see rejection above)
generating a second optimized speed control information according to an upper speed limit value and an upper acceleration limit value so that the current speed command increases to the upper speed limit value gradually. (Xu, see at least [0078] the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. *** if it’s determined that the platoon of vehicles can safely pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon system will accelerate and drive through the intersection. The acceleration above the current speed is interpreted as second speed decision process. The vehicles within the platoon will be commanded to accelerate at an accelerated speed compared to what the current speed command is. The vehicles will speed up and continue to speed until the speed adjustment is met.)
Regarding Claim 9, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the communication device includes a roadside device communication module; (see rejection above)
the environment sensing device includes at least one of a camera module, a radar sensing module or a combination thereof; (Xu, see at least [0093] “A connected vehicle includes a communication device and an environment sensor array for reporting the surroundings of the vehicle 124 to the server 125.” Also see [0094] wherein a sensor can be a camera, lidar or radar device.)
the positioning device generates the absolute position information according to a road position information received from the roadside device communication module, (Xu, see at least [0036] “Each vehicle 124 and/or mobile device 122 may include position circuitry such as one or more processors or circuits for receiving GNSS signals and comparing the GNSS signals to a clock to determine the absolute or relative position of the vehicle 124 and/or mobile device 122.”)
and generates the relative position information according to the information received from the environment sensing device. (Xu, see at least [0094-0095] wherein a sensor can be a camera, lidar or radar device and the vehicles also include a GPS system and sensing devices to measure vehicle information.)
Regarding Claim 10, Xu discloses A vehicle platoon intersection decision-making method, implemented with a computing device of a captain vehicle in a vehicle platoon, comprising the following steps: (Xu, see at least [0024] “A vehicle platoon system may have one lead vehicle. The lead vehicle may transmit commands to other vehicles in the platoon. The lead vehicle may travel at the beginning or head of the pattern of the platoon. The lead vehicle is followed by a series of vehicles (e.g., follower vehicles) that may closely maintain the speed, distance, and maneuvers of the lead vehicle.” Also see at least [Abstract] “A vehicle platoon control system performs techniques for controlling a platoon of vehicles through an intersection.”)
executing an intersection decision-making process; (Xu, see at least [Abstract] “A vehicle platoon control system performs techniques for controlling a platoon of vehicles through an intersection.”)
determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass an intersection with a current speed command according to an intersection signal information and an intersection distance information in an environment sensing information, a relative position information of vehicles in the vehicle platoon, an absolute position information of the captain vehicle, and the current speed command; (Xu, see at least Fig. 4 and [0336-0037] wherein the server 125 receives the location data from at least one and up to all the vehicles within the platoon, wherein each vehicle may include position circuitry to determine the absolute or relative position of the vehicle. The absolute or relative position may be stored as location data. Also see [0072] wherein the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection, the distance between the location data detected and the geographic location of the intersection. The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed or based on traffic data. And also see [0078] “the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. At act S115, the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.” Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is apart of the server 125.)
if yes, controlling the vehicles to maintain traveling with the current speed command, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0078] “At act S115, the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.” Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is apart of the server 125. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
and if not, generating a first optimized speed control information through a first speed decision process, transmitting the first optimized speed control information to the other vehicles, controlling the vehicle platoon to travel with deceleration before reaching the intersection until an acceleration critical time point, and starting travelling with acceleration, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection;(Xu, see at least [0080] “if the traffic data indicates that the road traffic condition is greater than a threshold, the lead vehicle in the vehicle platoon system notifies other vehicles that the vehicle platoon system will deaccelerate and wait at the intersection till the next green phase comes. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may notify the other vehicles directly.” Also see at least [0103-0104] wherein the processor 300 determines platoon data for a vehicle platoon traveling toward the intersection, data indicative of the position and/or speed of the vehicle platoon. Estimated arrival time for the platoon at the intersection is compared to intersection data to determine whether an adjustment to the platoon should be made. **after the determination of the platoon cannot safety pass the intersection and the speed is adjusted (decreased), when the next green phase comes, intersection controller 30 would determine if it is safe to pass the intersection and generate commands to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distances to efficiently pass the intersection, see Fig. 4. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
wherein when "the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection with the current speed command" is determined, the method further includes: determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with a traffic signal according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, and the intersection signal information; (Xu, see at least [0078] “the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles.”)
if yes, performing a coordinate communication with the traffic signal, and generating a second optimized speed control information through a second speed decision process, so that the vehicle platoon passes through the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0078] “the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. *** if it’s determined that the platoon of vehicles can safely pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon system will accelerate and drive through the intersection. The acceleration above the current speed is interpreted as second speed decision process. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
if not, generating the first optimized speed control information, and transmitting the first optimized speed control information to the other vehicles through the communication device, controlling the vehicle platoon to travel with deceleration before reaching the intersection; (Xu, see at least [0080] “if the traffic data indicates that the road traffic condition is greater than a threshold, the lead vehicle in the vehicle platoon system notifies other vehicles that the vehicle platoon system will deaccelerate and wait at the intersection till the next green phase comes. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may notify the other vehicles directly.” Also see at least [0103-0104] wherein the processor 300 determines platoon data for a vehicle platoon traveling toward the intersection, data indicative of the position and/or speed of the vehicle platoon. Estimated arrival time for the platoon at the intersection is compared to intersection data to determine whether an adjustment to the platoon should be made. **after the determination of the platoon cannot safety pass the intersection and the speed is adjusted (decreased), when the next green phase comes, intersection controller 30 would determine if it is safe to pass the intersection and generate commands to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distances to efficiently pass the intersection, see Fig. 4. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
wherein the step "determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the traffic signal" comprises the following sub steps: calculating an intersection passing time of a rearmost vehicle in the vehicle platoon according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, and determining whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than a sum of a remaining passing time of the traffic signal and a preset extending time; (Xu, see at least [0073] wherein the time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection. Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass.)
if yes, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the traffic signal; (Xu, see at least [0078] the intersection controller 30 determines that there is already time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and in response, does nothing. Alternatively, the intersection controller 30 may generate a command to maintain platoon speed and distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. Also see at least Fig. 2, wherein the intersection controller 30 is apart of the server 125. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
the coordinating with the traffic signal includes requesting to the traffic signal to extend the remaining passing time by the preset extending time; and if not, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection by coordinating with the traffic signal. (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
Xu does not explicitly disclose implemented with a computing device of a captain vehicle in a vehicle platoon
However, Matsumoto discloses implemented with a computing device of a captain vehicle in a vehicle platoon (Matsumoto, see at least [0014] wherein the leading vehicle comprises a management device.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the technique of utilizing the leading vehicle as a management device as taught by Matsumoto in which would then allow for a leading vehicle within the vehicle platoon to determine if the vehicles within the platoon can cross an intersection together without splitting off. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Modified Xu does not explicitly disclose a preset extended time
However, Cross discloses a preset extended time (Cross, see at least [0015-0016] wherein the light signals can increase a time period so that the green signal is given at a longer time)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the capability of a increasing the time period for a green signal as taught by Cross in which would improve the platoon’s ability to cross over the intersection, as the increasing of time for a green signal would allow for a platoon of vehicles to cross over simultaneously. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Regarding Claim 11, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the step “determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass an intersection with a current speed command” includes the following sub-steps: (see rejection above)
determining whether the signal status of the traffic signal is at a passing status according to the intersection signal information; (Xu, see at least [0072] “the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection..The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed of the vehicle 124 or may be based on the traffic data.”)
if the signal status of the traffic signal is at the passing status, calculating the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle in the vehicles according to the intersection distance information, (Xu, see at least [0073] “The time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection.” ** Fig. 5 showcases S101 wherein traffic data and SPaT and MAP data is received before a time to pass the intersection is calculated.) the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, (Xu, see at least [0072] “the intersection controller 30 may calculate the distance and time to intersection. The distance (e.g., distance A in FIG. 5) may be the arithmetic or geometric distance between the location data detected at the vehicle 124 and the geographic location of the intersection. The time to the intersection may be calculated by the current speed of the vehicle 124 or may be based on the traffic data.”) and determining whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than the remaining passing time of the traffic signal; (Xu, see at least [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
if the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is smaller than the remaining passing time, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command; (Xu, see at least [0073] “The time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection.” Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
if the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is not smaller than the remaining passing time, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass through the intersection with the current speed command; (Xu, see at least [0073] “The time to pass the intersection may be based on the length of the platoon (e.g., distance B in FIG. 5) or the time to intersection for the last vehicle in the platoon. The time to pass or reach the intersection may be based on the time when the last vehicle in the platoon passes or reaches the intersection.” Also see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** time of the phase changes and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
if the signal status of the traffic signal is at a non-passing status, calculating the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle in the vehicles according to the intersection distance information, the current speed command, the relative position information of the vehicles, determining whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle is larger than a remaining non-passing time of the traffic signal; and determining whether the intersection passing time of the rearmost vehicle minus the remaining non-passing time is smaller than a passing time of the traffic signal; and if both yes, the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command. (Xu, see at least [0073], and see [0076] and Fig. 4 (S105, S106, S109) wherein S111 uses the information of the time to the intersection and the time to pass the intersection and time of the phase changes for the intersection to determine if the intersection is safe to pass. ** data collected showcases the lighting data and a determination can be made of a non-passing status (red or even a yellow light) and the time to pass the intersection of the last vehicle within the platoon is used to determine if the vehicle platoon is able to pass safety based on the timing of the lighting. Therefore, if the time of the phase change is smaller than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is unable to pass. If the time of the phase change is larger than the time of the last vehicle to pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon is able to pass. **** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
Regarding Claim 14, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making method as claimed in claim 10, wherein when executing the intersection decision-making process, (see rejection above)
and if not, then determining whether the vehicle platoon is able to pass through the intersection with the current speed command. (Xu, see at least [0078] wherein the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. At act S113, the intersection controller 30 determines that there was not time to safely or efficiently pass the intersection and generates a command to adjust platoon speed and/or gap distance, which is sent to the lead vehicles to relay to the following vehicles or is sent directly to the following vehicles. *** This is a contingent limitation, under BRI, these steps do not have to be performed. MPEP 2111.04 II)
first determining whether a cut-in situation by an external vehicle occurs;
However, Matsumoto discloses first determining whether a cut-in situation by an external vehicle occurs; (Matsumoto, see at least [0118] wherein a cut-in by a vehicle traveling behind can be prevented)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Xu to include the capability of a determining if a cut-in situation is occurring as taught by Matsumoto in which would then allow for a vehicle platoon to utilize this data to determine if the vehicles within the platoon can cross an intersection together without splitting off. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Regarding Claim 17, Xu in view of Matsumoto in further view of Cross discloses The vehicle platoon intersection decision-making method as claimed in claim 12, wherein the second speed decision process includes: (see rejection above)
generating a second optimized speed control information according to an upper speed limit value and an upper acceleration limit value so that the current speed command increases to the upper speed limit value gradually. (Xu, see at least [0078] the intersection controller 30 receives signal phase data for the intersection, wherein the intersection is a signalized intersection and the time period is determined based on the signal phase data for the intersection. The intersection controller 30 may make a series of comparisons to determine whether adjustments are need for the platoon to traverse the intersection. *** if it’s determined that the platoon of vehicles can safely pass the intersection, the vehicle platoon system will accelerate and drive through the intersection. The acceleration above the current speed is interpreted as second speed decision process. The vehicles within the platoon will be commanded to accelerate at an accelerated speed compared to what the current speed command is. The vehicles will speed up and continue to speed until the speed adjustment is met.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6-7 and 15-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20200112973 – Use of a mobile user device to identify the individual operating a vehicle, which, either alone or in conjunction with a vehicle control unit (VCU), may be used to establish vehicle priority in connection with traffic control systems.
US 20170069203– Methods, systems, and computer program products for optimizing automobile traffic flow through an intersection by detecting and reducing platoon interference.
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 NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 8AM-5PM.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664