Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/507,762

SYSTEM FOR REAL-TIME DETERMINATION OF CALIBRATION OF AN INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Nov 13, 2023
Examiner
MIRZA, ADNAN M
Art Unit
3667
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
835 granted / 985 resolved
+32.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
1037
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 985 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al (U.S. 2020/0408529) and further in view of Green (U.S. 2022/0348188). 2. A system for real-time determination of calibration of an inertial measurement unit, the system [Accordingly, the HD map system 100 may store a representation of a network of lanes to allow the vehicle 150 to plan a legal path between a source and a destination and to add a frame of reference for real-time sensing and control of the vehicle 150] (Paragraph. 0082) comprising: an inertial measurement unit mounted on at least one of a vehicle, a tire supporting the vehicle, and a wheel on which the tire is mounted (Paragraph. 0007); a processor in electronic communication with the inertial measurement unit; a road mapping module in electronic communication with the processor (Paragraph. 0028), the road mapping module receiving a vehicle latitude and a vehicle longitude and determining a virtual heading angle of the vehicle (Paragraph. 0027); a virtual acceleration module in electronic communication with the processor (Paragraph. 0097), the virtual acceleration module receiving the virtual heading angle of the vehicle from the road mapping module and receiving a measured vehicle speed and a measured heading angle (Paragraph. 0051), the virtual acceleration module estimating a virtual lateral acceleration and a virtual longitudinal acceleration; a correlation module in electronic communication with the processor, the correlation module receiving the virtual lateral acceleration and the virtual longitudinal acceleration from the virtual acceleration module (Paragraph. 0043-044) and receiving a calibrated measured lateral acceleration and a calibrated measured longitudinal acceleration from the inertial measurement unit, the correlation module determining a correlation between the virtual lateral acceleration and the calibrated measured lateral acceleration and between the virtual longitudinal acceleration and the calibrated measured longitudinal acceleration (Paragraph. 0053 & 0116) [Examiner interpreted the correlation between virtual and measured acceleration as relationship between two values]; and However, Zeng did not disclose a notice being generated by the correlation module, the notice indicating a result of the correlation. In the same field of endeavor Green disclosed in some embodiments, an alarm signal is generated by the IMU in response to the difference between the corrected tilt angle and the recorded title angle being greater than the threshold (Paragraph. 0014). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to have incorporated in some embodiments, an alarm signal is generated by the IMU in response to the difference between the corrected tilt angle and the recorded title angle being greater than the threshold as taught by Green in the method and system of Zeng to increase the efficiency of tracking the vehicle location. 3. As per claim 2 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the notice is generated in real time as the vehicle is operating (Zeng, Paragraph. 0082). 4. As per claim 3 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the vehicle latitude and the vehicle longitude are obtained from a global positioning system unit (Zeng, Paragraph. 0043). 5. As per claim 4 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the road mapping module is in electronic communication with a map server (Zeng, Paragraph. 0004-0005). 6. As per claim 5 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the road mapping module corrects a measured trajectory of the vehicle and generates an enhanced trajectory of the vehicle from digital maps of the map server (Zeng, Paragraph. 0129). 7. As per claim 6 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the measured vehicle speed and the measured heading angle are obtained from a global positioning system unit (Zeng, Paragraph. 0043). 8. As per claim 7 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the inertial measurement unit executes a calibration routine to generate the calibrated measured longitudinal acceleration and the calibrated measured lateral acceleration (Zeng, Paragraph. 0092). 9. As per claim 8 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the correlation module generates a longitudinal acceleration correlation coefficient from the correlation between the virtual longitudinal acceleration and the calibrated measured longitudinal acceleration (Zeng, Paragraph. 0097). 10. As per claim 9 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein when a magnitude of the longitudinal acceleration correlation coefficient is high, the notice indicates measurements from the inertial measurement unit are accurate (Zeng, Paragraph. 0057). 11. As per claim 10 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein a high magnitude of the longitudinal acceleration correlation coefficient includes a value of about one (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 12. As per claim 11 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein when a magnitude of the longitudinal acceleration correlation coefficient is low, the notice indicates measurements from the inertial measurement unit are not accurate (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 13. As per claim 12 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein a low magnitude of the longitudinal acceleration correlation coefficient includes a value of about zero (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 14. As per claim 13 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the correlation module generates a lateral acceleration correlation coefficient from the correlation between the virtual lateral acceleration and the calibrated measured lateral acceleration (Zeng, Paragraph. 0028). 15. As per claim 14 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein when a magnitude of the lateral acceleration correlation coefficient is high, the notice indicates measurements from the inertial measurement unit are accurate (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 16. As per claim 15 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein a high magnitude of the lateral acceleration correlation coefficient includes a value of about one (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 17. As per claim 16 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein when a magnitude of the lateral acceleration correlation coefficient is low, the notice indicates measurements from the inertial measurement unit are not accurate (Zeng, Paragraph. 0096). 18. As per claim 17 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein a low magnitude of the lateral acceleration correlation coefficient includes a value of about zero (Zeng, Paragraph.0096). 19. As per claim 18 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the inertial measurement unit is included in a telematic control unit (Zeng, Paragraph. 0047). 20. As per claim 19 Zeng-Green disclosed wherein the notice is transmitted from the processor to an electronic control system of the vehicle (Green, Paragraph 0014). The claim 19 has the same motivation as to claim 1. Response to Arguments 21. Applicant's arguments filed 11/11/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Response to applicant’s arguments are as follows. A. Applicant argued that prior art did not disclose, “a system for real-time determination of calibration of an inertial measurement longitudinal acceleration”. Zang disclosed, “Accordingly, the HD map system 100 may store a representation of a network of lanes to allow the vehicle 150 to plan a legal path between a source and a destination and to add a frame of reference for real-time sensing and control of the vehicle 150” (Paragraph. 0082). B. Applicant argued that prior art did not disclose, “the correlation module determining a correlation between the virtual lateral acceleration and the calibrated measured lateral acceleration and between the virtual longitudinal acceleration and the calibrated measured longitudinal acceleration”. As to applicant’s argument Zeng disclosed, “Additionally or alternatively, when determining the lever arm vector, multiple velocity measurements may be used and/or the aggregate of multiple velocity measurements may be used to help improve the accuracy of the lever arm vector determination, which may improve the calibration accuracy. More specifically, with the three components spelled out, the relationship between the various terms when aggregating the multiple velocity measurements may be as follows (Paragraph. 0116). [Examiner interpreted the correlation between virtual and measured acceleration as relationship between two values. Whereas examiner interpreted the” measure acceleration” as change in velocity meaning multiple velocity measurements during different time provide the measured acceleration]. Conclusion 22. 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. 23. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885. 24. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821. 25. 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 un published applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free). /ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 13, 2023
Application Filed
May 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 11, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12578196
Road Recognition Method and Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576743
CHARGER SELECTION SYSTEM, CHARGER SELECTION METHOD, AND CHARGER SELECTION PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570328
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE WITH CONTINGENCY CONSIDERATION IN TRAJECTORY REALIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560931
COLLABORATIVE ORDER FULFILLMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560451
METHOD FOR POSITIONING A MAP REPRESENTATION OF AN ENVIRONMENT OF A VEHICLE IN A SEMANTIC ROAD MAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 985 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month