DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s Amendments and Remarks filed on 8/12/2025.
Response to Arguments
Drawing objections of the most recent Office action have been removed due to Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed 8/12/2025, hereafter referred to as Applicant’s arguments.
Rejections under 35 USC 112(a-b) of the most recent Office action have been removed due to Applicant’s arguments.
Applicant's arguments, pg(s). 8-11, in regards to the prior art rejections to the pending claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts, pg(s). 9,
“The amended claim 1 includes the feature of adjusting map information when a prediction indicates that the moving object will enter a region where situation information exists. Here, the adjustment of the map information means adjusting the path according to the situation prediction.”
However, this is not what the amended limitation of claim 1 recites. Rather, the claim recites “the adjusted map information includes information of a presence region including adjusted path, wherein the presence region corresponds to a region, where the situation information exists, of the map information”. This limitation does not recite or suggest i) a “prediction… that the moving object will enter a region where situation information exists” or ii) “adjusting map information when…the moving object will enter a region”, as stated on pg. 9 of Applicant’s arguments.
Applicant asserts, pg(s). 9,
“Specifically, the amended claim includes the feature of providing adjusted map information only for the region corresponding to the adjusted path when it is predicted that the moving object will enter a region where situation information exists. Thus, the adjusted map information is not a map including merely new information or a new route, but a map derived from the existing map that includes map information only for a region corresponding to the adjusted route.”
Similarly, as stated above, this is not what the amended limitation of claim 1 recites. Rather, the claim recites “the adjusted map information includes information of a presence region including adjusted path, wherein the presence region corresponds to a region, where the situation information exists, of the map information”. This limitation does not recite or suggest i) a prediction “that the moving object will enter a region where situation information exists” or ii) “providing adjusted map information only for the region corresponding to the adjusted path”, as stated on pg. 9 of Applicant’s arguments.
Thus, In response to applicant's arguments that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a “prediction…that the moving object will enter a region where situation information exists”, “providing adjusted map information only for the region corresponding to the adjusted path”, and “adjusting map information when…the moving object will enter a region”, as stated on pg. 9 of Applicant’s arguments) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant asserts, pg(s). 9-10,
“Baik discloses receiving precise map data based on profile information and does not disclose or suggest a configuration for adjusting the map.”
The examiner disagrees. Baik teaches selecting map information [0038, 0040, 0047-0048] and adjusting the map information based on situation information regarding a situation around the vehicle [0035, 0061-0062], where the adjusting the map information corresponds to the generated “precise map” [0061-0062].
Applicant asserts, pg(s). 10,
“although Baik discloses receiving new precise map data during travel, this cannot be equated with the map adjustment process of the claimed invention, which modifies an existing route within the same region rather than simply replacing map data.”
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “modifies an existing route within the same region rather than simply replacing map data”, as stated on pg. 10 of Applicant’s arguments.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“communication unit” in claim(s) 11, described in Applicant’s specification as “communication unit 202” [last para., pg. 23 – first para., pg. 24].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 recite(s) the limitation “a presence region including adjusted path”. This limitation is unclear and thus, the claim(s) is/are indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear what the “adjusted path” is of, i.e., the “adjusted path” of what? For the purposes of examination, the examiner is interpreting the scope of the limitation to be that the “presence region” includes an “adjusted path” of the “moving object”.
Claims 2-10 are rejected due to their dependency on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Baik (US 20210341940 A1) in view of Wu (US 20220412764 A1).
Regarding claim 11, and similarly claim 1, Baik teaches A device for providing an adaptive map for diverse autonomous navigation platforms, the device comprising:
a communication unit configured to exchange data with a moving object (“communication module 120 communicating with the server 30”, [0094], “The communication module 120 may support establishing a direct (e.g., wired) communication channel or a wireless communication channel between the electronic device 100 and an external electronic device (e.g., a component of the vehicle 10”, [0092]);
a memory configured to store at least one instruction (“at least one memory 130 storing the at least one instruction”, [0094]); and
a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction by using the data (“at least one processor 110 executing at least one instruction”, [0094]),
wherein the processor is further configured to:
generate environment information around a moving object based on perception information acquired from the moving object equipped with a sensor (“a system for providing precise map data (hereinafter, referred to as a system) may include a vehicle 10, a plurality of other vehicles 20 (21, 22, 23, . . . )”, [0034], Fig. 1, “For example, each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 may collect driving data via at least one sensor while travelling along a predetermined route”, [0036]),
select at least one piece of map information among multiple pieces of map information based on characteristics information and the environment information, wherein the characteristics information includes at least one of a sensing performance of the moving object, processing performance of the moving object, and communication performance of the moving object, and a type of the moving object (“the server 30 may directly generate pieces of precise map data by receiving pieces of driving data from the plurality of other vehicles 20.”, [0040], “Each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 may obtain precise map data corresponding to a specific route based on the driving data. For example, each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 may obtain, based on driving data for a specific route (e.g., measurement information about road structures, lanes, stop lines, and road markings on the specific route, etc.), precise map data including map information, road environment information, and road condition information, all of which are 3D representations of roads and their surroundings on the specific route.”, [0038], “the server 30 may determine at least one piece of precise map data to be provided to the vehicle 10 based on profile information of the vehicle 10, which is received from the vehicle 10.”, [0047], “The profile information of the vehicle 10 may include, for example, at least one of sensor information regarding at least one sensor mounted on the vehicle 10, communication efficiency information of the vehicle 10, and driving information of the vehicle 10.”, [0048]),
adjust the map information based on situation information representing a situation around the moving object recognized from the environment information (“The base precise map acquisition unit 202 of the server 30 may acquire a base precise map from a base precise map (or a base High-Definition map) database (DB) 209. The base precise map may be a precise map generated using driving data or precise map data provided by the plurality of other vehicles 20 described above.”, [0061], “The precise map feature extractor 203 of the server 30 may select at least one map layer from among a plurality of sub-layers constituting a precise map. For example, the precise map feature extractor 203 may select at least one map layer from among a plurality of map layers constituting a precise map, based on the profile information of the vehicle 10 acquired by the profile information acquisition unit 201. The precise map feature extractor 203 may extract feature data from the selected at least one map layer.”, [0062], “Precise map data may be data including all information necessary for making a determination to control an operation of an autonomous vehicle. The precise map data may include basic road information, surrounding environment information, detailed road environment information (e.g., terrain elevation, terrain curvature, etc.), and dynamically changing road condition information (traffic congestion, an accident section, a construction section, etc.). The precise map data may include high-precision map data (or high-definition (HD) map data).”, [0035]), and
transmit the adjusted map information to the moving object (“The precise map provider 205 of the server 30 may transmit the generated precise map data to the vehicle 10.”, [0064]),
However, Wu teaches
wherein the adjusted map information includes information of a presence region including adjusted path, wherein the presence region corresponds to a region, where the situation information exists, of the map information (“In a possible implementation, if determining, based on the lane-level road information of the initial navigation path, that an impassable road or a congested road exists in the initial navigation path, the navigation map module updates the initial navigation path based on the determined impassable or congested road and the first location information and the destination of the target vehicle, and determines an updated initial navigation path as the navigation path.”, [0131], “A navigation method provided in the embodiments of this application may be applied to an intelligent transportation system. A high-definition map can be used for a vehicle in the intelligent transportation system to implement traffic services. The traffic services in the embodiments of this application may be various self-driving and assisted driving services, for example, performing path planning and providing a risk early warning for manual driving.”, [0072])).
Both Baik and Wu teach adjusting map information based on situation information and both teach an adaptive map for autonomous navigation platforms. Wu further teaches the adjusted map information includes a presence region with an adjusted path for the autonomous vehicle where the situation information exists. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Baik with the teachings of Wu such that the adjusted map of Baik includes an adjusted path, as taught by Wu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to “better navigation experience for the user” of the vehicle [0043], as taught by Wu.
Regarding claim 2, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the plurality of map information includes a base map made in a format according to a predetermined regulation (“navigation map 310”, Fig. 3), a geometric map geometrically expressing an object element on a road in which the moving object is drivable (“routing layer 312”, Fig. 3), an occupancy map that expresses an object element having a dynamic behavior on the road in a grid form (landmark map layer 324”, Fig. 3), a semantic map including at least connection relation information that defines object elements connected on the road (“lane geometry map layer 325”, Fig. 3), a prior knowledge map including at least operating information of an object element that controls driving of the moving object on the road (“point cloud map layer 322”, Fig. 3, a real-time knowledge map including at least association information that defines data mutually associated in the situation information (“radar signature map layer 326”, Fig. 3), and a map for positioning for supporting positioning of a moving map (“visualization map layer 311”, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the perception information includes direct recognition information and indirect recognition information that the moving object acquires, the direct recognition information is recognition information that the moving object detects on its own (“each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 may collect driving data via at least one sensor while travelling along a predetermined route and generate precise map data based on the collected driving data.”, [0036]), and the indirect recognition information is recognition information, which detects an object element beyond a perception range of a sensor of the moving object, and is recognition obtained from another moving object near the moving object (“the driving data may be data including a driving image, sensed information, measurement information, etc., obtained via at least one sensor coupled to each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 while each vehicle is traveling along a predetermined route, but is not limited thereto.”, [0036]).
Regarding claim 4, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the environment information is generated based on perception information of an object element transmitted from the moving object and another moving object near the moving object, and the perception information is collected as multiple pieces of perception information in order to have multiple views in time series (“the driving data may be data including a driving image, sensed information, measurement information, etc., obtained via at least one sensor coupled to each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 while each vehicle is traveling along a predetermined route”, [0036], “each of the plurality of other vehicles 20 may obtain precise map data corresponding to a specific route in real-time by using driving data collected while traveling.”, [0039]).
Regarding claim 5, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the type of the moving object includes at least one of a ground moving object (Fig. 1), an aerial moving object, and a marine moving object, the map information is selected based on at least requirement-specialized information determined according to the type of the moving object (“the server 30 may determine at least one piece of precise map data to be provided to the vehicle 10 based on profile information of the vehicle 10, which is received from the vehicle 10.”, [0047]), and the requirement-specialized information includes information required for the map information based on at least one of a moving object flow pattern, path safety degree, and function maintenance degree of a specific module of the moving object (“The profile information of the vehicle 10 may include, for example, at least one of sensor information regarding at least one sensor mounted on the vehicle 10, communication efficiency information of the vehicle 10, and driving information of the vehicle 10.”, [0048]).
Regarding claim 6, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the map information is constructed to include path information of the moving object (“provide precise map data appropriate for the vehicle 10 requesting precise map data for a particular route”, [0034]), and the map information is determined based on additional data together with the characteristics information of the moving object and the environment information of the moving object (“the server 30 may determine at least one piece of precise map data to be provided to the vehicle 10 based on profile information of the vehicle 10, which is received from the vehicle 10.”, [0047], “The profile information of the vehicle 10 may include, for example, at least one of sensor information regarding at least one sensor mounted on the vehicle 10, communication efficiency information of the vehicle 10, and driving information of the vehicle 10.”, [0048]), and
wherein the additional data includes at least one of movement pattern information of the moving object, which is identified by history information of the moving object, similarity information on a path similar to a movement course or a traffic state of the movement course, a use frequency of the path information in the course, a modification frequency of the path information, a request frequency of a user for the path information, and map evaluation information generated by a simulation using a potential traffic state inferred from the environment information (“the profile information of the vehicle 10 may further include information about the surrounding environment of the vehicle 10. For example, the information about the surrounding environment of the vehicle 10 may include environment complexity such as traffic congestion, pedestrian congestion, street complexity, etc.”, [0055], where the “traffic congestion, pedestrian congestion, street complexity” corresponds to Applicant’s “potential traffic state”).
Regarding claim 7, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the adjusting of the map information includes generating second map information corresponding to the presence region of the situation information by referring to first map information selected according to the environment information in front of the presence region and the environment information of the presence region, in response to the moving object being predicted to enter the presence region, and
wherein the first map information and the second map information are configured as different types of information (“For example, referring to FIG. 7, the vehicle 10 located in the first area 601 may transmit information of the first profile (e.g., the first profile in FIG. 3) to the server 30 while traveling in the first area 601 ({circle around (1)}) and receive, from the server 30, the first precise map data related to at least one map layer selected from among the plurality of map layers based on the information of the first profile ({circle around (2)}). Furthermore, while traveling in the first area 601, the vehicle 10 located in the first area 601 may transmit in advance, to the server 30, location information of the second area 602, which is a planned driving route, and information of the second profile expected from the second area 602 ({circle around (3)}) and receive in advance, from the server 30, and store precise map data related to at least one map layer selected from among the plurality of map layers based on the information of the second profile ({circle around (4)}). Furthermore, while traveling in the second area 602, the vehicle 10 may perform autonomous driving by using the previously received precise map data.”, [0086]).
Regarding claim 8, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches wherein the adjusting of the map information includes providing path information to the map information based on at least one of path information already generated by past data associated with the situation information and path information derived from a prediction model according to training based on the situation information (“The server 30 may classify the pieces of precise map data according to predetermined criteria and perform a predetermined management process. For example, the server 30 may manage pieces of precise map data by classifying them according to each vehicle providing the precise map data, each route, each time, each context, or each reliability.”, [0041], “as shown in FIG. 7, the vehicle 10 may receive in advance precise map data corresponding to an area in which the vehicle 10 is expected to travel. For example, in order to improve the safety of autonomous driving, the vehicle 10 may receive and store in advance a plurality of pieces of precise map data corresponding to an area in which the vehicle 10 is expected to travel.”, [0085], see also [0086]).
Regarding claim 9, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1, and Baik further teaches further comprising adjusting the map information in detail based on user information and mobility details information, prior to the transmitting of the adjusted map information to the moving object (“The profile information of the vehicle 10 may include, for example, at least one of sensor information regarding at least one sensor mounted on the vehicle 10, communication efficiency information of the vehicle 10, and driving information of the vehicle 10.”, [0048]),
wherein the user information includes at least one of a preferred path in a course, where the moving object moves, and a path pattern (“the server 30 may manage pieces of precise map data by classifying them according to each vehicle providing the precise map data, each route, each time, each context, or each reliability.”, [0041], see also [0049]), and the mobility details information includes sensor information including a detailed specification of the sensor and detailed performance of the sensor and mobility constraint information according to the type and a specification of the moving object (“The sensor information regarding at least one sensor mounted on the vehicle 10 may include at least one of a sensor type, the number of sensors, a sensor mounting location, and a sensor specification. For example, types of a vehicular sensor may include a RADAR sensor that measures a distance to an object, a LIDAR sensor that measures a distance to an object by using a laser beam, an image sensor (or camera) that recognizes surrounding objects, or a stereo image sensor (or stereo camera) that is a sensor capable of measuring a distance to an object as well as recognizing the surrounding objects.”, [0050], see also [0051, 0054-0055]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Baik (US 20210341940 A1) in view of Wu (US 20220412764 A1) in view of Urano et al. (US 20170122749 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Baik in view of Wu teaches The method of claim 1,
However, Urano teaches
acquiring feedback information associated with use of the map information obtained during control of a movement of the moving object according to the adjusted map information (“in S42, the map update determination system 200 determines whether or not the evaluation value of the traveling plan for the zone falls short of the evaluation threshold by using the map update determination unit 18. The map update determination unit 18 determines whether or not the evaluation value of the traveling plan for the zone falls short of the evaluation threshold for the zone based on the evaluation value of the traveling plan calculated by the evaluation value calculation unit 17 and the set evaluation threshold.”, [0139]); and
updating the map information based on the feedback information (“In S44, the map update determination system 200 determines that the map information update is necessary in that zone.”, [0140], “The map database 4 updates the map information on a regular basis by using the latest map information stored in the server in the map information management center.”, [0075], see also [0163]),
wherein the updating includes updating the map information based on result data verified by a simulation using movement data of the moving object derived from the feedback information (“The map update determination system 200 calculates an evaluation value of the traveling plan based on a result of a comparison between the control target value of the traveling plan and the control result detection value resulting from the automatic driving control. The map update determination system 200 compares the control target value of the traveling plan and the control result detection value resulting from the automatic driving control to each other for each of the set longitudinal positions on the target route R. The evaluation value of the traveling plan is calculated as a value greater when the control target value of the traveling plan and the control result detection value resulting from the automatic driving control correspond to each other.”, [0053], “The simulated traveling plan generation unit 43 generates a simulated traveling plan based on the target route R of the vehicle M acquired by the information acquisition unit 42 and the map information of the map database 41. The simulated traveling plan is a plan that is generated as a simulation and is not used for the actual automatic driving control for the vehicle M. The simulated traveling plan differs from the traveling plan of the automatic driving system 300 generated based on the in-vehicle map database 31 and is generated based on the map information of the map database 41 of the server 40.”, [0157]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Baik in view of Wu with the teachings of Urano such that the method of Baik further comprises updating the map information based on the feedback information, as taught by Urano, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to “allow[] the necessity of the map information update to be determined at an appropriate time during the automatic driving control” to decrease maintenance costs and avoid operating the moving object using an outdated map, as taught by Urano [0006].
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMELIA VORCE whose telephone number is (313) 446-4917. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9AM-6PM, Central Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMELIA VORCE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666