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 .
This is a Final Office Action in response to application 18/521,198 entitled "METHOD TO MEASURE INSURABILITY BASED ON RELATIVE OPERATOR PERFORMANCE" filed on August 21, 2025, with claims 1, 4-11, 12, 14, 15, and 18-20 pending.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 9, 12, and 20 have been amended and are hereby entered.
Claims 2, 3, 6, 13, and 16 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 4-11, 12, 14, 15, and 18-20 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 21, 2025, has been entered. Claims 1, 4-11, 12, 14, 15, and 18-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and/or Claims have been noted in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 11, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, and 8-11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 reads, “programmatic control logic including a measuring insurability based on…” It should read as either “programmatic control logic including [ or “programmatic control logic including an insurability measurement based on…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 4-11, 12, 14, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Please see MPEP 2106 for additional information regarding Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
Claims 1, 4-11, 12, 14, 15, and 18-20 are directed to a system, method/process, machine/apparatus, or composition of matter, which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent Claim 1 recites:
“A system for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance, the system comprising: …
…wherein …including a measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance (MIROP) application, the MIROP application comprising:
a first control logic for identifying event information within data… including:
control logic for detecting event information, wherein the event information comprises: instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time, and fuel economy;
control logic for comparing instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, and hard cornering to threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values;
the event information to the cloud computing server, including:
control logic that periodically …event information, relating to the instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration and hard cornering that meet or exceed the threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values, to the cloud computing server, wherein the threshold acceleration and braking value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.3G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, where G is the acceleration of gravity, and wherein the threshold cornering value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.6G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, and wherein the threshold acceleration, braking and cornering values are higher than 0.3G and 0.6G, respectively on highway entrance ramps;
a third control logic for assessing a physical location and proximity …participating in the system;
a fourth control logic for assessing a road surface condition of a road segment upon which …is traveling;
a fifth control logic for estimating a traffic density on the road segment, including:
control logic for obtaining information …including one or more traffic…, wherein the traffic … report, to the host vehicle, current and historical traffic information about the road segment; and
control logic that utilizes data from the traffic … and from the one or more sensors to estimate a traffic density including traffic signal status at approximately a one second accuracy, and that determines when the host vehicle is approaching or passing through a traffic signal;
a sixth control logic for aggregating host vehicle behavioral data over the road segment per host vehicle trip, and identifying event identifiers (IDs) ….behavioral data; a seventh control logic for computing a vehicle operator insurability score;
an eighth control logic for automatically notifying an insurance carrier of the vehicle operator insurability score; and
a ninth control logic for automatically presenting to a host vehicle operator, …score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score.”
These limitations clearly relate to managing transactions/interactions between consumer/buyer and/or insurance providers. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructions for “measuring insurability” and “computing a vehicle operator insurability” and “presenting … score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or managing personal behavior (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as managing personal behavior and/or a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of:
[and a cloud computing server in communication] [one or more remote vehicles, the one or more sensors comprising: cameras, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors, Radio Detection and Ranging (RADAR) sensors, Sound Navigation and Ranging (SONAR) sensors, ultrasonic sensors, inertial measurement units (IMUs), global positioning system (GPS) satellites, cellular towers, and roadside sensing devices, the one or more sensors detecting optical or electromagnetic information about the host vehicle, the remote vehicles, the environment surrounding the host vehicle and remote vehicles, and detecting attitude or position, linear velocity, acceleration, and angular rates of the host vehicle and the remote vehicles; ] [and the cloud computing server has a controller, the controller including a processor, a memory, and one or more input/output (I/O) ports, the I/O ports in communication] [the memory storing programmatic control logic; the processor executing the programmatic control logic; the programmatic control logic] [via the I/O ports of the controller][to the cloud computing server][via a human-machine interface (HMI)]:
merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[a host vehicle, and one or more remote vehicles;][one or more sensors] [of the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles][with the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles;][each of the host vehicle, the one or more remote vehicles] [with the one or more sensors][of one or more of the host vehicle] [the I/O ports of the one or more remote vehicles] [within the host vehicle ] [of the host vehicle to remote vehicles] [the host vehicle] [ capturing host vehicle and remote vehicle information, and capturing environmental information about an environment … obtained from the one or more sensors]:
merely applying automotive technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[for transmitting …a second control logic ..the event information][transmits] [from one or more application programming interfaces (APIs) ][APIs] :
insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception of data gathering
are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination.
For the “transmitting” step, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that the courts have recognized receiving or transmitting data over a network as well-understood, routine and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more)
Dependent Claims recite additional elements.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the recited additional elements of
Claim 4:
“database”: merely applying computer storage technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
“one or more of the remote vehicles…of the host vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicles as a tool to perform an abstract idea
Claim 5:
“sensors”, “host vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicle technology as a tool to perform an abstract idea
“application programming interfaces (APIs)”: merely applying computer networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
Claim 7:
“host vehicle and/or remote vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicle technology as a tool to perform an abstract idea
“database”: merely applying computer storage technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
Claim 8: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea)
Claim 9: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea)
Claim 10: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea)
Claim 11:
“an infotainment display of the host vehicle, an instrument cluster of the host vehicle, an interior rear-view screen of the host vehicle, a cellular device, a laptop computer, and a tablet computer,”: generally linking to display devices as tools to perform an abstract idea
are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic process. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, these dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
Independent Claim 12 recites:
“A method for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance, the method comprising: capturing, …information …and capturing environmental information about an environment surrounding …and
utilizing one or more controllers disposed in each …, the controllers each …
the programmatic control logic including an application for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance (MIROP application), the MIROP application comprising: identifying event information within data obtained from the …
.. of the controller ..
comparing instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, and hard cornering to threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values, wherein the threshold acceleration and braking value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.3G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, where G is the acceleration of gravity, and wherein the threshold cornering value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.6G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, and wherein the threshold acceleration, braking and cornering values are higher than 0.3G and 0.6G, respectively on highway entrance ramps;
the event information;
including: …. event information, relating to the instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration and hard cornering that meet or exceed the threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values,…;
assessing a physical location and proximity … participating in the method;
assessing a road surface condition of a road segment upon which the …is traveling;
estimating a traffic density on the road segment, including:
obtaining information …including one or more traffic …, wherein the traffic …report, to the host vehicle, current and historical traffic information about the road segment; and
utilizing data from the traffic … and from the one or more sensors to estimate a traffic density including traffic signal status at approximately a one second accuracy, and that determines when the host vehicle is approaching or passing through a traffic signal;
aggregating host vehicle behavioral data over the road segment and per host vehicle trip, and identifying event IDs within the host vehicle behavioral data;
computing a vehicle operator insurability score;
automatically notifying an insurance carrier of the vehicle operator insurability score; and
automatically presenting …operator…score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score.”
These limitations clearly relate to managing transactions/interactions between consumer/buyer and/or insurance providers. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructions for “measuring insurability” and “computing a vehicle operator insurability” and “presenting … score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or managing personal behavior (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as managing personal behavior and/or a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of:
[and the cloud computing server] [cloud computing server in communication with the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles][ the one or more sensors including: detecting event information comprising: instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time, and fuel economy;] [including a processor, a memory, and one or more input/output (I/O) ports, the I/O ports in communication ][the memory storing programmatic control logic; the processor executing the programmatic control logic],[ via a human- machine interface (HMI),]:
merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[via one or more sensors,] [one or more sensors comprising: cameras, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors, Radio Detection and Ranging (RADAR) sensors, Sound Navigation and Ranging (SONAR) sensors, ultrasonic sensors, inertial measurement units (IMUs), global positioning system (GPS) satellites, cellular towers, and roadside sensing devices, the one or more sensors detecting optical or electromagnetic information about the host vehicle, the remote vehicles, the environment surrounding the host vehicle and remote vehicles, and detecting attitude or position, linear velocity, acceleration, and angular rates of the host vehicle and the remote vehicles] [about a host vehicle and one or more remote vehicles,] [the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles] [with the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles] [of the host vehicle, the one or more remote vehicles][with the one or more sensors] [one or more sensors][via the I/O ports] [of one or more of the host vehicle and the I/O ports of the one or more remote vehicles][of the host vehicle to remote vehicles][host vehicle] [to a host vehicle]:
merely applying automotive technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[for transmitting… the event information to the cloud computing server] [ transmitting, via the I/O ports of the controller of one or more of the host vehicle and the I/O ports of the one or more remote vehicles… to the cloud computing server] [periodically transmitting] [from one or more application programming interfaces (APIs)][APIs]:
insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception of data gathering
are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, Claim 12 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination.
For the “transmitting” step, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that the courts have recognized receiving or transmitting data over a network as well-understood, routine and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more)
Dependent Claims recite additional elements.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the recited additional elements of
Claim 14:
“database”: merely applying computer storage technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
“one or more of the remote vehicles…of the host vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicles as a tool to perform an abstract idea
Claim 15:
“sensors”, “host vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicle technology as a tool to perform an abstract idea
“obtaining information …application programming interfaces (APIs)”: merely applying computer networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
Claim 17:
“host vehicle and/or remote vehicle”: merely applying automotive vehicle technology as a tool to perform an abstract idea
“database”: merely applying computer storage technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
Claim 18: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea)
Claim 19:
“an infotainment display of the host vehicle, an instrument cluster of the host vehicle, an interior rear-view screen of the host vehicle, a cellular device, a laptop computer, and a tablet computer,”: generally linking to display devices as tools to perform an abstract idea
are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, these dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
Independent Claim 20 recites:
“A method for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance, the method comprising:
capturing, …information about …and capturing environmental information about an environment surrounding …
utilizing one or more controllers disposed…, the controllers each …the programmatic control logic including an application for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance (MIROP application), the MIROP application comprising: identifying event information within data obtained…., including:
…comprising: instances …hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time,
and fuel economy;
comparing instances …hard braking, hard acceleration, and hard cornering threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values, wherein the threshold acceleration and braking value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.3G on a surface street in a low- traffic situation, where G is the acceleration of gravity, and wherein the threshold cornering value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.6G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, and wherein the threshold acceleration, braking and cornering values are higher than 0.3G and 0.6G, respectively on highway entrance ramps
periodically …of the controller of …event information, relating to the instances of …hard braking, hard acceleration and hard cornering that meet or exceed the threshold acceleration, braking, and
cornering values, …assessing a physical location and proximity …participating in the method, including: confirming a location of the …relative to map information stored in a map …
determining a location … relative to map information stored in the map ...and
determining that …is at or below a threshold physical distance …or that one or more …has traversed a road segment at or within a threshold quantity of time relative …
assessing a road surface condition of a road segment upon which the host vehicle is traveling, including: utilizing data from the …to estimate a road surface type, a road surface condition, a presence or absence of obstacles on the road segment, a location of lane markings on the road segment; and
obtaining information from … including a weather …wherein the weather …provides weather information for the environment surrounding the host vehicle on the road segment;
estimating a traffic density on the road segment, including: obtaining information …including one or more traffic …wherein the traffic …report, to the [host vehicle], current and historical traffic information about the road segment; and
utilizing data from the traffic …and from the …to estimate a traffic density including traffic signal status at approximately a one second accuracy, and that determines when the host vehicle is approaching or passing through …
aggregating …behavioral data over the road segment and per host vehicle trip, and identifying event IDs within the … behavioral data, including: identifying event IDs corresponding to instances …hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time,
and fuel economy; determining when …perspectives is available, wherein upon determining that…perspectives is available utilizing the …
perspectives to provide context to behavior …and
accessing a road profile …that includes physical characteristics of the road segment, and contextual information, including traffic data, time of day information, and road surface information relating to the road segment;
computing a vehicle operator insurability score, including: calculating first order vehicle operator driving characteristics;
calculating a derived time series for vehicle operator driving parameters of interest; and
applying weighting factors to each to determine a relative performance of the vehicle operator in comparison with similarly- situated remote vehicle operators in similar contexts over the road segment or similar road segments;
calculating aggressiveness x(t), via sudden acceleration a(t) and close following distances b(t);
calculating an average aggressiveness according to:
II. (pi):xcalculating a standard deviation in aggressiveness according to:
III.):xcalculating a vehicle operator aggressiveness trend over time according to:
IV. (pi):#^=g>0;(a- where (xi - x)2 is a normalizing characteristic, and #^ indicates whether the vehicle 12, 12' operator is becoming more, less, or equally aggressive over a predefined quantity of time; and calculating a cumulative distribution function (CDF) that ranks all participating host and remote vehicle operator performance according to:
>jwg * rank(ai, Q1);where each an defines a characteristic of a particular event Qnon a per-vehicle n basis, and wi defines the weighting factors;
automatically notifying an insurance carrier of the vehicle operator insurability score, including: selectively notifying an insurance carrier of the vehicle operator insurability score based on one or more of: a predetermined time schedule, a quantity of distance traveled by the host vehicle operator, identified behavioral changes, host vehicle location changes, and host vehicle commute pattern changes; and
automatically presenting to a host vehicle operator, …score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score, including: presenting the operator score information and vehicle operation suggestions on … wherein the vehicle operation suggestions comprise: score improvement advice,
driving behavior improvement suggestions, driving route modification suggestions, and host vehicle mode selection suggestions.”
These limitations clearly relate to managing transactions/interactions between consumer/buyer and/or insurance providers. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructions for “measuring insurability” and “computing a vehicle operator insurability” and “presenting … score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or managing personal behavior (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as managing personal behavior and/or a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of:
[a cloud computing server] [acloud computing server in communication with the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles, ][and the cloud computing server][including a processor, a memory, and one or more input/output (I/O) ports, the I/O ports in communication with the one or more sensors; the memory storing programmatic control logic; the processor executing the programmatic control logic;] [to the cloud computing server;] [database][database][database] [via a human- machine interface (HMI),] [one or more of: an infotainment display of the host vehicle, an instrument cluster of the host vehicle, an interior rear-view screen of the host vehicle, a cellular device, a laptop computer, and a tablet computer]:
merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[via one or more sensors][ the one or more sensors comprising: cameras, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors, Radio Detection and Ranging (RADAR) sensors, Sound Navigation and Ranging (SONAR) sensors, ultrasonic sensors, inertial measurement units (IMUs), global positioning system (GPS) satellites, cellular towers, and roadside sensing devices, the one or more sensors detecting optical or electromagnetic information about the host vehicle, the remote vehicles, the environment surrounding the host vehicle and remote vehicles, and detecting attitude or position, linear velocity, acceleration, and angular rates of the host vehicle and the remote vehicles; ][a host vehicle and one or more remote vehicles] [the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles][the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles][in each of the host vehicle, the one or more remote vehicles][of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle] [of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle] [via the I/O ports] [one or more of the host vehicle and the I/O ports of the one or more remote vehicles][host vehicle and/or remote vehicle] [of the host vehicle to remote vehicles] [host vehicle] [of the one or more remote vehicles][one or more of the remote vehicles] [of the remote vehicles] [of the host vehicle] [to the host vehicle][one or more sensors] [one or more sensors] [host vehicle] [of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle] [one or more remote vehicle] [one or more remote vehicle] [remote vehicle] [of the host vehicle;] [from the one or more sensors][ detecting event information]:
merely applying automotive technology as tools to perform an abstract idea
[for transmitting] :
insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception of data gathering
[one or more application programming interfaces (APIs)][API,] [from one or more application programming interfaces (APIs)] [APIs][APIs]:
insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception of data gathering
[a traffic signal];:
generally linking to traffic control devices
are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality.
Additionally, claims that manipulate only numbers, abstract concepts or ideas, or signals representing any of the foregoing, are not appropriate patentable subject matter. See Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 71 - 72, 175 USPQ 673, 676 (1972). Thus, a process consisting solely of mathematical operations, i.e., converting one set of numbers into another set of numbers, does not manipulate appropriate subject matter and thus cannot constitute a statutory process. See MPEP 2106.02 Mathematical Algorithms. In practical terms, claims define non-statutory processes if they: consist solely of mathematical operations without some claimed practical application (i.e., executing a "mathematical algorithm"); or simply manipulate abstract ideas, e.g., a bid (Schrader, 22 F.3d at 293-94, 30 USPQ2d at 1458-59) or a bubble hierarchy (Warmerdam, 33 F.3d at 1360, 31 USPQ2d at 1759), without some claimed practical application.
Therefore, Claim 20 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application)
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination.
For the “transmitting” step, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that the courts have recognized receiving or transmitting data over a network as well-understood, routine and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more)
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fields ("VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ALERTS FOR AVOIDANCE OF ABNORMAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS", U.S. Patent Number: US 9805601 B1), in view of Ersal (“LANE CHANGE MANEUVERS WITH MINIMIZED TIRE SLIP”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20200406969 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Fields teaches,
A system for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance,
(Fields [Col 6, Lines 43-47] The insurance provider remote server may calculate, update, and/or adjust insurance premiums, rates, discounts, points, programs, etc., such as adjusting an insurance discount or premium based upon the insured having the functionality discussed herein
Fields [Col 5, Lines 48-49] data detailing or associated with vehicle operation, and/or driving or driver behavior.)
the system comprising: a host vehicle, and one or more remote vehicles; one or more sensors capturing host vehicle and remote vehicle information, and capturing environmental information about an environment of the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles;
(Fields [Abstract] generating a vehicle-to-vehicle traffic alert.... electronic message may be transmitted via the vehicle's transceiver...to a nearby vehicle to alert the nearby vehicle of the abnormal traffic condition and to allow the nearby vehicle to avoid the abnormal traffic condition.
Fields [Col 5, Lines 50-52] collecting telematics data and/or other data associated with driver behavior and/or vehicle operation or performance
Fields [Col 31, Lines 29-31] The other vehicle data may be indicative of the other vehicles, environmental conditions, or vehicles of interest.)
the one or more sensors comprising: cameras, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors, Radio Detection and Ranging (RADAR) sensors, Sound Navigation and Ranging (SONAR) sensors, ultrasonic sensors, inertial measurement units (IMUs), global positioning system (GPS) satellites, cellular towers, and roadside sensing devices, the one or more sensors detecting optical or electromagnetic information about the host vehicle, the remote vehicles, the environment surrounding the host vehicle and remote vehicles, and detecting attitude or position, linear velocity, acceleration, and angular rates of the host vehicle and the remote vehicles;
(Fields [Col 5, Lines 5-10] the vehicle-mounted computer or the mobile device may be equipped with (i) various sensors and/or meters capable of generating telematics data (GPS unit, speed sensor, speedometer, odometer, gyroscope, compass, accelerometer, etc.) and/or (ii) an application, such as a Telematics Data Application or Telematics
Fields [Col 57, Lines 43-45] operation of the vehicle 108 (e.g., collision avoidance systems, adaptive cruise control systems, automatic lane centering systems, etc.)
Fields [Col 42, Lines 9-10] digital optical cameras, infrared cameras, or similar sensors
Fields [Col 4, Lines 50-55] telematics ....to remote vehicles and/or drivers.
Fields [Col 35, Lines 24-26] based upon sensor data from a plurality of other vehicles 202 (such as by triangulation).
Fields [Col 65, Lines 18-20] sensors, including one or more of: a camera, video recording, infrared device, radar unit, or other sensors)
and a cloud computing server in communication with the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles;
(Fields [Col 52, Lines 11-13] a database associated with a server or in a cloud computing data storage
Fields [Col 52, Lines 37-43] transmit the telematics data to the remote server.... cause the telematics data (or a summary thereof) to be transmitted from the mobile computing device 110 or on-board computer 114 to the remote server
Fields [Col 23, Lines 5-8] telematics may be received directly from other vehicles, or indirectly from...remote servers.)
wherein each of the host vehicle, the one or more remote vehicles, and the cloud computing server has a controller, the controller including a processor, a memory,
(Fields [Col 6, Lines 1-5] The computing device, such as a vehicle computer or a mobile device (and/or Telematics App) may be configured to ...transmit ... to other mobile devices, a remote server, smart vehicles, and/or smart infrastructure.
Fields [Col 6, Lines 14-18] the mobile device (and/or Telematics App) may transmit the telematics and/or other data.... to a second computing device—such as a second mobile device (or another driver), a second and smart vehicle, a remote server
Fields [Col 4, Lines 39-42] may include a mobile device, a vehicle-mounted processor, computer server, ... applications, software modules, ... memory units)
and one or more input/output (I/O) ports, the I/O ports in communication with the one or more sensors;
(Fields [Col 13, Lines 33-35] an input/output (I/O) interface 310, each of which may be interconnected via an address/data bus 312. Controller 340 may be implemented as any suitable type and/or number of processors
Fields [Col 26, Lines 42-51] data may be received directly or indirectly from the vehicle 108 (i.e., from a mobile computing device 110 or on-board computer 114 disposed within or associated with the vehicle 108). ...from sensors ...or other sources based upon sensor data. For example, GPS location data obtained from a location acquisition unit 320 of a mobile computing device 110 within the vehicle 108 may be used)
the memory storing programmatic control logic; the processor executing the programmatic control logic; the programmatic control logic including
(Fields [Col 72, Lines 55-56] including logic or a number of routines, subroutines, applications, or instructions.
Fields [Col 73, Lines 3-10] a hardware module may comprise dedicated circuitry or logic that is permanently configured (e.g., as a special-purpose processor, such as a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC)) to perform certain operations. A hardware module may also comprise programmable logic or circuitry (e.g., as encompassed within a general-purpose processor or other programmable processor))
a measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance (MIROP application), the MIROP application comprising: a first control logic for identifying event information within data obtained from the one or more sensors;
(Fields [Col 6, Lines 43-47] calculate, update, and/or adjust insurance premiums, rates, discounts, points, programs, etc., such as adjusting an insurance discount or premium based upon the insured having the functionality discussed herein
Fields [Col 5, Lines 48-49] data detailing or associated with vehicle operation, and/or driving or driver behavior.
Fields [Col 72, Lines 55-56] including logic or a number of routines, subroutines, applications, or instructions.
Fields [Col 33, Lines 43-48] determine anomalous conditions affecting many drivers (e.g., traffic jams, heavy pedestrian traffic such as in the vicinity of a sporting event, etc.). Determining the occurrence of an anomalous condition may include comparing sensor data with previously recorded data for the local environment)
including: control logic for detecting event information, wherein the event information comprises: instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time, and fuel economy;
(Fields [Col 34, Lines 30-35] indicate that a vehicle 202.1 is engaged in hard braking (indicated by a rapid decrease in speed), which may have been caused by a sudden lane change
Fields [Col 33, Lines 55-56] rapid acceleration or braking, speed less than a threshold amount above or below a posted speed limit
Fields [Col 68, Lines 43-45] detecting vehicle cornering to be above a predetermined threshold, or detecting that vehicle unexpectedly swerved
Fields [Col 32, Lines 4-5] average vehicle speed
Fields [Col 57, Line 44] collision avoidance systems
Fields [Col 37, Lines 61-62] lane deviation warnings
Fields [Col 5, Line 8] odometer
Fields [Col 55, Lines 2-3] determined by reference to an internal clock
Fields [Col 36, Line 67 to Col 37, Line 2] methods may also be implemented to save fuel)
control logic for comparing instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, and hard cornering to threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values;
(Fields [Col 21, Lines 11-15] a first vehicle (collecting and/or associated with the telematics data) may be individually or collectively compared with current speed, location, route, destination, and/or direction of travel of a second vehicle
Fields [Col 28, Lines 27-30] comparing...time-stamped GPS and/or speed data (and/or other telematics data) to determine if the vehicle or another vehicle was a cause of the vehicle accident
Fields [Col 35, Lines 43-48] comparing the reconstructed path of the vehicle 108 with the paths of the other vehicle 202 in the vehicle .... the movement of other vehicles
Fields [Col 33, Lines 55-56] rapid acceleration or braking, speed less than a threshold amount above or below a posted speed limit)
a second control logic for transmitting, via the I/O ports of the controller of one or more of the host vehicle and the I/O ports of the one or more remote vehicles, the event information to the cloud computing server;
(Fields [Col 72, Lines 55-56] including logic or a number of routines, subroutines, applications, or instructions.
Fields [Col 13, Lines 33-35] an input/output (I/O) interface 310, each of which may be interconnected via an address/data bus 312. Controller 340 may be implemented as any suitable type and/or number of processors
Fields [Col 6, Lines 14-18] the mobile device (and/or Telematics App) may transmit the telematics and/or other data.... to a second computing device—such as a second mobile device (or another driver), a second and smart vehicle, a remote server)
a third control logic for assessing a physical location and proximity of the host vehicle to remote vehicles participating in the system;
(Fields [Col 1, Line 65-66] an electronic message is sent from a vehicle to a nearby vehicle
Fields [Col 21, Lines 24-30] the geographic relationship, a radius from one vehicle or a line-of-sight distance between vehicles may be utilized and compared to a threshold distance. .... determines a line-of-sight distance between a first and second vehicle to be less than a threshold distance)
including: control logic that periodically transmits event information,
(Fields [Col 2, Lines 47-53] one or more computing devices may broadcast the telematics data and/or the geographic location data to one or more other devices via V2x communication, such as to other vehicles, infrastructure, remote servers)
relating to the instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration and hard cornering that meet or exceed the threshold acceleration, braking, and cornering values,
(Fields [Col 28, Lines 27-30] comparing...time-stamped GPS and/or speed data (and/or other telematics data) to determine if the vehicle or another vehicle was a cause of the vehicle accident
Fields [Col 35, Lines 43-48] comparing the reconstructed path of the vehicle 108 with the paths of the other vehicle 202 in the vehicle .... the movement of other vehicles
Fields [Col 33, Lines 55-56] rapid acceleration or braking, speed less than a threshold amount above or below a posted speed limit)
to the cloud computing server
(Fields [Col 2, Lines 47-53] one or more computing devices may broadcast the telematics data and/or the geographic location data to one or more other devices via V2x communication, such as to other vehicles, infrastructure, remote servers)
a third control logic for assessing a physical location and proximity of the host vehicle to remote vehicles participating in the system;
(Fields [Col 1, Line 65-66] an electronic message is sent from a vehicle to a nearby vehicle
Fields [Col 21, Lines 24-30] the geographic relationship, a radius from one vehicle or a line-of-sight distance between vehicles may be utilized and compared to a threshold distance. .... determines a line-of-sight distance between a first and second vehicle to be less than a threshold distance)
a fourth control logic for assessing a road surface condition of a road segment upon which the host vehicle is traveling;
(Fields [Col 1, Line 65-66] an electronic message is sent from a vehicle to a nearby vehicle
Fields [Col 21, Lines 31-54] anomalous condition with a road and to determine the relevance of the anomalous condition based upon other vehicles sharing the road. … determines that a second computing device 300 in a vehicle travelling on the same highway is within a threshold distance approaching the first vehicle
Fields [Col 60, Lines 56-59] monitoring distance threshold may depend upon the operating conditions (e.g., limited access highway, residential street, heavy traffic, low traffic, clear weather, icy road conditions, etc.).
Fields [Col 47, Lines 29-31] outside the vehicle 108 (e.g.,....weather conditions, road integrity, construction, lane closures, etc.)
Fields [Col 5, Line 4] other data as a vehicle is traveling.)
a fifth control logic for estimating a traffic density on the road segment
(Fields [Col 22, Lines 18-19] data indicative of potentially increasing road densities
Fields [Col 45, Lines 34-36] abnormal traffic condition may be (1) an erratic vehicle or driver; (2) road construction; (3) closed highway exit; (4) slowed or slowing traffic or congestion
Fields [Col 35, Lines 23-25] estimation of the location or properties ...based upon sensor data from a plurality of other vehicles)
including: control logic for obtaining information from one or more application programming interfaces (APIs) including one or more traffic APIs, wherein the traffic APIs report, to the host vehicle, current and historical traffic information about the road segment; and
(Fields [Col 1, Line 66 to Col 2, Line 2] electronic message is sent from a vehicle ...alert the nearby vehicle that an abnormal traffic condition has occurred
Fields [Col 2, Lines 55-56] determine whether an anomalous condition exists, such as a traffic accident
Fields [Col 4, Lines 3-4] exemplary traffic condition broadcast method
Fields [Col 4, Lines 57-59] short-term traffic events
Examiner contends that a determination of “abnormal" or "anomalous" requires a comparison against baseline historical data )
control logic that utilizes data from the traffic API and from the one or more sensors to estimate a traffic density including traffic signal status at approximately a one second accuracy, and that determines when the host vehicle is approaching or passing through a traffic signal;
(Fields [Col 30, Lines 62-65] data may indicate times when a traffic signal changed between various states (e.g., when a traffic light changed between green, yellow, and red, when a railroad crossing signal sounded or lowered a gate, etc.).
Fields [Col 16, Lines 60-63] timestamps synchronized to the sampling of one or more sensor metrics (which may be measured to within hundredths of a second or smaller resolutions)
Fields [Col 38, Lines 13-16] based upon sensor data (e.g., GPS location data indicating the vehicle 108 is approaching a dangerous intersection or traffic back-up))
a sixth control logic for aggregating host vehicle behavioral data over the road segment per host vehicle trip,
(Fields [Col 43, Lines 3-11] that profiles may be generated for each driver or each vehicle using information regarding the vehicle usage and driving behavior of drivers... upon occurrence of an event
Fields [Col 54, Lines 23-26] Such driving events may be events indicative of improper driving behavior...Based upon the identified driving events
Fields [Col 48, Lines 2-3]sensor data regarding vehicle braking, vehicle speed, number of vehicles on a segment of the roadway,
Fields [Col 24, Lines 18-23] collected over one or more vehicle trips or days, and may be associated with multiple drivers of the vehicle, and/or the telematics and/or other data may be used to identify the driver driving the vehicle during each trip.)
and identifying event identifiers (IDs) within the host vehicle behavioral data;
(Fields [Col 55, Lines 12-15] may identify one or more driving events indicative of improper or prohibited driving behavior based upon the received telematics data
Fields [Col 68, Lines 20-21] determine an indication of a trigger event from computer analysis of telematics or sensor data
Fields [Col 68, Lines 36-51] trigger event may be the one or more processors or sensors detecting vehicle speed unexpectedly or rapidly decreasing; detecting the vehicle following distance unexpectedly or rapidly decreasing; detecting a brake pedal being engaged ... detecting vehicle deceleration above a predetermined threshold; detecting vehicle cornering to be above a predetermined threshold,... the trigger event may be an infrared camera or radar unit detecting an animal ... or the automatic deployment of a vehicle collision avoidance system)
a seventh control logic for computing a vehicle operator insurability score;
(Fields [Col 44, Lines 33-43] a driver may have a baseline of 80 points, from which 5 points may be subtracted for driving in heavy traffic conditions, 2 points may be subtracted for following too closely behind other vehicles, one point may be added for consistent use of turn signals,... may be the driver's previous cumulative score...the driving score may indicate a risk level associated with operation of the vehicle 108 by the driver)
an eighth control logic for automatically notifying an insurance carrier of the vehicle operator insurability score; and
(Fields [Col 44, Line 58 to Col 45, Line 14] change to an insurance policy based upon the current vehicle-usage profile. …Determining an update to an insurance policy may include determining a change in one or more risk levels associated with operation of the vehicle …The driving scores may be used to directly or indirectly determine risks associated with each driver for purposes of determining updates or changes to the insurance policy
Fields [Col 3, Lines 1-2] data may be used by an insurance provider to generate auto insurance discount and/or risk averse profiles)
a ninth control logic for automatically presenting to a host vehicle operator, via a human-machine interface (HMI), score information and vehicle operation suggestions to improve the vehicle operator insurability score.
(Fields [Col 56, Lines 57-58] provide for feedback to the evaluated driver to help improve driving behavior.
Fields [Col 50, Lines 40-50] the mobile computing device 110 or on-board computer 114 may cause the determined alert or recommendation to be presented to the driver of the vehicle 202. This may include causing a visual warning to be presented on a screen associated with the mobile computing device 110 or on-board computer 114, an audible warning to be presented by a speaker, or other types of warnings...Recommendations may similarly be presented to the driver, such as by presentation of text on a screen or as spoken recommendations.
Fields [Col 56, Lines 56-63] systems and methods disclosed herein may further provide for feedback to the evaluated driver to help improve driving behavior. The driver evaluations may be combined with other data relating to a driver or vehicle, from which a driving score or profile may be generated. Driving scores or profiles may then be used to alert)
Fields does not teach wherein the threshold acceleration and braking value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.3G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, where G is the acceleration of gravity, and wherein the threshold cornering value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.6G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, and wherein the threshold acceleration, braking and cornering values are higher than 0.3G and 0.6G, respectively on highway entrance ramps;
Ersal teaches,
wherein the threshold acceleration and braking value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.3G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation, where G is the acceleration of gravity,
(Ersal [0225] The GPS sensor may also provide traffic information about the roadway such as lane closures, vehicle accidents, stopped vehicles ahead of the ego vehicle 1205 with respect to general traffic flow on the roadway
Ersal [0130] the only deceleration considered is through the tire-road interaction. For the host vehicle braking at 30 m/s and decelerating at the peak tire force of 0.8 g
Ersal [0154] aggressive lane change can take place in approximately half the distance limit braking at 0.8 g)
and wherein the threshold cornering value is contextually greater than or equal to 0.6G on a surface street in a low-traffic situation,
(Ersal [0068] a safety margin introduced to capture corner clipping on the vehicle side. Corner clipping occurs when the vehicle's CG is appropriately in the lane, but due to vehicle rotation, the vehicle corners extend into the original lane
Ersal [0130] the only deceleration considered is through the tire-road interaction. For the host vehicle braking at 30 m/s and decelerating at the peak tire force of 0.8 g
Ersal [0154] aggressive lane change can take place in approximately half the distance limit braking at 0.8 g)
and wherein the threshold acceleration, braking and cornering values are higher than 0.3G and 0.6G, respectively on highway entrance ramps;
(Ersal [0234] the object can be the end of a lane such as the end of an on-ramp merge lane
Ersal [0225] The GPS sensor may also provide traffic information about the roadway such as lane closures, vehicle accidents, stopped vehicles ahead of the ego vehicle 1205 with respect to general traffic flow on the roadway
Ersal [0130] the only deceleration considered is through the tire-road interaction. For the host vehicle braking at 30 m/s and decelerating at the peak tire force of 0.8 g)
It is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the driving behavior evaluation system of Fields to incorporate the gravitational acceleration monitoring of Ersal for “parameters are tuned to represent a tire with 0.8 g peak traction… and 10% force relaxation at high slip angles.” (Ersal [0075]). The modification would have been obvious, because it is merely applying a known technique (i.e. gravitational acceleration) to a known concept (i.e. driving behavior evaluation) ready for improvement to yield predictable result (i.e. “to appropriately capture vehicle yaw rate.” Ersal [0075])
Regarding Claim 4,
Fields and Ersal teach measuring insurability based on driver performance of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Fields teaches,
wherein the third control logic further comprises:
control logic for confirming a location of the host vehicle relative to map information stored in a map database; control logic for determining a location of the one or more remote vehicles relative to map information stored in the map database; and control logic for determining that one or more of the remote vehicles is at or below a threshold physical distance of the host vehicle, or that one or more of the remote vehicles has traversed the road segment at or within a threshold quantity of time relative to the host vehicle.
(Fields [Col 21, Lines 37-43] geographic location data may be correlated with a map database.... The map database may be stored, for example, in a suitable portion of computing device
Fields [Col 21, Lines 46-54] determine, from telematics data and geographic location data received from a first computing device 300, that a first vehicle is located on a highway at a certain geographic location.... determines that a second computing device 300 in a vehicle travelling on the same highway is within a threshold distance approaching the first vehicle, then the external computing device may issue an alert notification to the second vehicle)
Regarding Claim 5,
Fields and Ersal teach measuring insurability based on driver performance of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Fields teaches,
wherein the fourth control logic further comprises: control logic for utilizing data from the one or more sensors to estimate a road surface type, a road surface condition, a presence or absence of obstacles on the road segment, a location of lane markings on the road segment; and
(Fields [Col 21, Lines 66-67] that a first vehicle is located on a highway at a certain geographic location.
Fields [Col 31, Lines 44-45] another object (e.g., debris in a roadway, a mailbox, a tree, etc.).
Fields [Col 33, Lines 39-41] vehicle environment (e.g., accidents, reckless driving, impaired driving, vehicle emergencies, vehicle breakdowns, potholes, lane closures, etc.)
Fields [Col 60, Lines 56-59] monitoring distance threshold may depend upon the operating conditions (e.g., limited access highway, residential street, heavy traffic, low traffic, clear weather, icy road conditions, etc.).
Fields [Col 47, Lines 29-31] outside the vehicle 108 (e.g.,....weather conditions, road integrity, construction, lane closures, etc.))
control logic for obtaining information from one or more application programming interfaces (APIs) including a weather API, wherein the weather API provides weather information for the environment surrounding the host vehicle on the road segment.
(Fields [Col 26, Lines 53-55] external computing device 206 may be one or more servers operated by or on behalf of an insurer or third-party risk assessor
Fields [Col 54, Lines 45-46] third-party monitoring service
Fields [Col 61, Lines 23-24] may be a remote server associated with a third-party
Fields [Col 26, Lines 50-53] may be used to query weather data from the National Weather Service or other databases of weather data
Fields [Col 47, Lines 41-44] atmospheric conditions (e.g., temperature, precipitation, wind, etc.), or other data regarding a local environment)
Regarding Claim 7,
Fields and Ersal teach measuring insurability based on driver performance of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Fields teaches,
wherein the sixth control logic further comprises: control logic for identifying event IDs corresponding to instances of host vehicle and/or remote vehicle hard braking, hard acceleration, hard cornering, average speed, seat belt status, stability control status, frontal collision avoidance (FCA) activation, lane departure warning (LDW) activation, distance driven, clock time, and fuel economy;
(Fields [Col 55, Lines 12-15] may identify one or more driving events indicative of improper or prohibited driving behavior based upon the received telematics data.
Fields [Col 2, Lines 38-41] telematics data may include various metrics that indicate the direction, speed, acceleration, braking, cornering, and/or motion of the vehicle in which the data is associated.)
control logic for determining when one or more remote vehicle perspectives is available, wherein upon determining that one or more remote vehicle perspectives is available utilizing the remote vehicle perspectives to provide context to behavior of the host vehicle; and
(Fields [Col 21, Lines 24-31] a radius from one vehicle or a line-of-sight distance between vehicles may be utilized and compared to a threshold distance. For example, if computing device 300 is implemented as an external computing device and determines a line-of-sight distance between a first and second vehicle to be less than a threshold distance (e.g., a half mile, one mile, etc.), then the external computing device may issue an alert notification to both vehicles)
control logic for accessing a road profile database that includes physical characteristics of the road segment, and contextual information, including traffic data, time of day information, and road surface information relating to the road segment.
(Fields [Col 11, Lines 42-43] one or more databases and/or storage devices
Fields [Col 31, Lines 44-45] another object (e.g., debris in a roadway, a mailbox, a tree, etc.).
Fields [Col 60, Lines 56-59] monitoring distance threshold may depend upon the operating conditions (e.g., limited access highway, residential street, heavy traffic, low traffic, clear weather, icy road conditions, etc.).
Fields [Col 47, Lines 29-31] outside the vehicle 108 (e.g.,....weather conditions, road integrity, construction, lane closures, etc.)
Fields [Col 22, Lines 20-24] changes in a type of road upon which computing device 300 is determined to be travelling, time of day, weather conditions, known risk levels of areas or road segments (e.g., high-risk intersections), etc.)
Regarding Claim 8,
Fields and Ersal teach measuring insurability based on driver performance of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Fields teaches,
wherein the seventh control logic further comprises: control logic for calculating first order vehicle operator driving characteristics; control logic for calculating a derived time series for vehicle operator driving parameters of interest; and control logic for applying weighting factors to each to determine a relative performance of the vehicle operator in comparison with similarly-situated remote vehicle operators in similar contexts over the road segment or similar road segments.
(Fields [Col 20, Lines 1-8] will indicate the speed of the first vehicle over a period of time. If the one or more sensor metrics indicate that the first vehicle's speed is below the speed limit by some threshold amount or proportion thereof (e.g., 20 mph in a 55 mph zone, 50% of the posted speed limit, etc.) and this is maintained for a threshold duration of time (e.g., 30 seconds, one minute, two minutes, etc.)
Fields [Col 59, Lines 61 to Col 60, Line 5] used to update a profile or score associated with the target vehicle 202.1 and/or a driver thereof, such as by adjusting a weighted score or adjusting a level included within the profile. .... to warn other drivers... an insurance policy associated with the target vehicle ...may be revised based upon evaluations by other drivers (e.g., ....evaluations by other drivers).)
Regarding Claim 11,
Fields and Ersal teach measuring insurability based on driver performance of Claim 8 as described earlier.
Fields teaches,
wherein the ninth control logic further comprises: control logic for presenting the operator score information and vehicle operation suggestions on one or more of: an infotainment display of the host vehicle, an instrument cluster of the host vehicle, an interior rear-view screen of the host vehicle, a cellular device, a laptop computer, and a tablet computer, wherein the vehicle operation suggestions comprise: score improvement advice, driving behavior improvement suggestions, driving route modification suggestions, and host vehicle mode selection suggestions.
(Fields [Col 50, Lines 40-50] This may include causing a visual warning to be presented on a screen associated with the mobile computing device 110 or on-board computer 114, an audible warning to be presented by a speaker, or other types of warnings...Recommendations may similarly be presented to the driver, such as by presentation of text on a screen or as spoken recommendations.
Fields [Col 7, Line62 to Col 8, Line 5] mobile computing device 110 may be implemented as any suitable computing or mobile device, such as a mobile device (e.g., smartphone, tablet, laptop, wearable electronics, phablet, pager, personal digital assistant (PDA), smart glasses, smart watch or bracelet, etc.), while on-board computer 114 may be implemented
Fields [Col 44, Lines 33-43] a driver may have a baseline of 80 points, from which 5 points may be subtracted for driving in heavy traffic conditions, 2 points may be subtracted for following too closely behind other vehicles, one point may be added for consistent use of turn signals,... may be the driver's previous cumulative score...the driving score may indicate a risk level associated with operation of the vehicle 108 by the driver behavior of drivers... upon occurrence of an event
Fields [Col 56, Lines 57-58] provide for feedback to the evaluated driver to help improve driving behavior.)
Claim 12 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1.
Claim 14 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 4.
Claim 15 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 5.
Claim 17 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 7.
Response to Remarks
Applicant's arguments filed on August 21, 2025, have been fully considered and Examiner’s remarks to Applicant’s amendments follow.
Response Remarks on Claim Objections
Applicant’s amendments, with respect to the previous objections of claims have been fully addressed. However, upon further consideration of newly amended claims, a new grounds of objections are made.
Response Remarks on Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The Applicant states:
“The present invention is directed to "[a] system for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator performance" where the system comprises, among other items, "a host vehicle, and one or more remote vehicles", "one or more sensors... of the host vehicle and the one or more remote vehicles"…. Applicant's application is directed to systems and methods for measuring insurability based on relative vehicle operator driving performance…. While Applicant understands the Office's motivations to suggest that "sensors" and "vehicles" are generic components, because the Applicant has described a nonexhaustive list of possible types of each, Applicant submits that the mere recitation of a list of possible examples does not render a recitation generic to the extent that it becomes unpatentably abstract…. To more clearly point out and define the metes and bounds of the subject matter that Applicant regards as the invention, Applicant has amended the independent claims to include a non-exclusive group of sensors that the system and method require to perform the claimed processes. "
Examiner responds:
Given the Applicant “Applicant understands the Office's motivations to suggest that "sensors" and "vehicles" are generic components,” Examiner will not reiterate both the abstract idea classification and the assignment of additional elements (also see current Office Action - Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101).
Examiner will explain why said components remain generic and including “a non-exclusive group of sensors” does not aid in patent eligibility.
The focus of the claims is not on an improvement in sensors or vehicles as tools, but on certain independently abstract ideas that use sensors and vehicles as tools.
Nothing in the claims, understood in light of the specification, requires anything other than “merely applying” off-the-shelf, conventional sensors and vehicle technology for gathering, synthesizing, sending, and presenting the desired information. See MPEP 2106.05(d) well-understood, routine, and conventional.
The sensors and vehicles are recited at a high-level of generality. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads:
[0032] it should be appreciated that the host vehicle 12 may be any of a wide variety of vehicles 12 including but not limited to cars, trucks, sport-utility vehicles (SUVs), buses, semi-tractors, tractors used in farming or construction or the like, watercraft, aircraft such as planes or helicopters or the like
[0035] the sensors 32 disposed on the host vehicle 12 may include any of a wide variety of sensor types
[0033] Computer readable medium includes any type of medium capable of being accessed by a computer, such as read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), a hard disk drive, a compact disc (CD), a digital video disc (DVD), or any other type of memory....Computer code includes any type of program code, including source code, object code, and executable code.
[0038] The driving data may include any of a wide variety of data
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer (or vehicle or sensor) cannot component provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claims do not describe improving sensors or vehicles, but rather merely gathering data information from sensor and vehicles.
The Applicant states:
“These are a plurality of sensors that are used for particular purposes to collect particular real-world, tangible data, which is subsequently used in calculations that cannot be practically carried out by a human mind (or using pen-and-paper) to achieve a particular tangible real-world result. "
Examiner responds:
To “to collect particular real-world, tangible data, which is subsequently used in calculations” describes Mere Data Gathering [Obtaining information about transactions using the Internet to verify credit card transactions, CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011)].
The amended claims do not provide specific processing rules that clearly deviate from how a human would process such information. Moreover, the performance of the claim limitations using generic computer component (e.g. processor or sensor) does not preclude the claim limitation from being in the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping.
Examiner suggests reviewing MPEP 2106.05(a) - Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, by improving:
Speed
Resource efficiency
Enhanced security
Physical transformation
Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC § 101 remains.
Response Remarks on Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Applicant's amendments required the application of new/additional prior art.
New prior art includes:
Ersal (“LANE CHANGE MANEUVERS WITH MINIMIZED TIRE SLIP”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20200406969 A1).
Applicant’s remarks regarding the rejection made under 35 USC § 102 are rendered moot by the introduction of additional prior art.
Claims 9, 10, 18, 19, and 20 are not taught by the applied prior art references.
Therefore, a rejection under 35 USC § 103 remains for Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17.
Prior Art Cited But Not Applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Tran (“SMART VEHICLE”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20240317254 A1) proposes a smart car method for autonomous navigation by creating a 3D model based on outputs of the camera and sensor, accessing a high definition map database and generating a trip with travel segments from origin to destination; detecting a freeway entrance or an exit lane based on a road marking using a camera and a sensor, if the travel segment passes the freeway entrance or exit, then follow the current lane without exiting; and otherwise following the freeway entrance or exit.
Ratnasingam (“DYNAMIC LEARNING DRIVING SYSTEM AND METHOD”, U.S. Publication Number: 20170305434 A1) provides dynamically assessing and improving driver performance, including that of an autonomous driving system. Based on received electronic driver performance messages, the system determines whether an instant feedback message is required to dynamically adjust driving behavior of a subject driver or autonomous driving system. If yes, then the system provides an instant feedback message, otherwise the system provides an aggregate feedback message, calibration message, and/or coaching recommendation as appropriate. An aggregate feedback message may be provided based at least on integral rating and/or driver performance score calculated and based at least on the driver performance messages received over a predetermined time period. The system may be adapted to perform one or more of the following: calculate insurance premium, insurance coverage, calculate cost of hiring a vehicle, monitor driving quality of drivers, recruit drivers, provide incentives, provide coaching, provide driver performance reports, and inform a third party about the driving performance of a subject driver.
Ansari (“SMART VEHICLE”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20160358477 A1) proposes smart vehicle can be operated by generating a 3D model of a sensor's field of view; receiving information from neighboring vehicles to compensate for blindspots in the sensor's field of view and in a driver's field of view; receiving traffic information, weather information; adjusting one or more characteristics of the plurality of 3D models based on the received traffic and weather information and blindspot information; aggregating the plurality of 3D models to generate a comprehensive 3D model; and combining the comprehensive 3D model with detailed map information; and using the combined comprehensive 3D model with detailed map information to maneuver the vehicle.
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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHINEDU EKECHUKWU whose telephone number is (571)272-4493. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10am to 4pm ET. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Christine Tran, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. 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.
/C.E./
Examiner, Art Unit 3695
/CHRISTINE M Tran/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3695
Prosecution Insights