DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “, when the second Bezier curve path does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region the processor is configured to determine that there is no risk of collision between the vehicle and the object driving on the target lane , and to determine the fifth point as a target entry point into the target lane” would be better understood as “[[,]]; when the second Bezier curve path does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region, the processor is configured to determine that there is no risk of collision between the vehicle and the object driving on the target lane[[ ]], and to determine the fifth point as a target entry point into the target lane”.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the processor is configured to generates” should recite “the processor is configured to generate[[s]]”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 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 recites “when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied”. The limitation when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in appears to contradict that the processor…configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path wherein the cut-in path is within the drivable region for cutting-in. Applicant’s specification recites page 6: determining whether the cut-in activation condition is satisfied includes determining that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied when the vehicle is driving on a merging lane, there is no space available for lane change in a target lane for lane change and page 10: in response to a case where there are driving objects (other vehicles) in a target lane for merging during autonomous driving and the objects occupy a space of the target lane and there is no space in which lane change can be performed, the vehicle path generating apparatus 100 may attempt to cut into a space between the objects. In this case, the drivable region is a region in which a vehicle can drive to cut in, and the vehicle path generating apparatus 100 may determine the drivable region by using a right lane of an own lane in which the vehicle is driving, a left lane of the target lane, and the like. Further, under broadest reasonable interpretation, the metes and bounds required for a difference between a drivable region for cutting-in and no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in appears unclear in the claim because cutting-in includes merging from a first lane to a second lane. Claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale because claim 18 recites “determining that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied when there is no space available or performing lane change for the cutting-in”. Accordingly, the limitations are interpreted in light of the instant specification and as best understood.
Claim 9 recites “wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length”. There is a lack of sufficient antecedent basis for “the fifth point”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200180636 (“Oh’636”) in view of US 20180129206 (“Harada”).
As per claim(s) 1, Oh’636 discloses a vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor (see at least [0019]: one or more processors, [0115]: a computer and stored in a computer-readable recording medium); and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor (see at least [0115]: a computer and stored in a computer-readable recording medium), cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path (see at least [0084]: may determine the position of an area A.sub.tar in which the safe distance is secured between the target vehicle V.sub.C and the rear approaching vehicle V.sub.D to be a target point P.sub.tar, [0085]: path generation unit 134 may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point P.sub.tar. Here, the cut-in path may be a traveling path in which the host vehicle V.sub.ego deviates toward the target point P.sub.tar, [0086]: velocity controller 136 may perform control to reduce the velocity of the host vehicle V.sub.ego to a first velocity v.sub.d calculated based on predetermined velocity information along the cut-in path, generated by the path generation unit 134, [0109]: may perform control such that the host vehicle travels while deviating toward the target point (S612). Here, the first velocity means the minimum movement velocity desired for the host vehicle to perform the lane change),
when there is no intention to yield by the rear approaching vehicle for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determined that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied (see at least [0105]: lane-change recognition unit 132 may determine whether the traveling lane and the target lane are congested based on whether each of the calculated first and second velocity flows is less than a critical value (S605), [0107]: Upon determining that the traveling lane and the target lane are congested (YES in S605), the path generation unit 134 may estimate a cut-in point of the preceding vehicle (S607), may determine a target point of the target lane from the estimated cut-in point (S608), and may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point (S610), [0111]: In the case in which the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield (YES in S613), the lane change may be performed, and the vehicle running control method may be finished (S614), [0113]: procedure may return to step S613 such that the danger-degree determination unit 138 determines whether the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield.), but Oh does not explicitly disclose no space.
However, Harada teaches no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in (see at least abstract: perform a countermeasure control to contend with merging into the merging destination lane while continuing to automatically drive the host vehicle, in the event that a search result is obtained which indicates that an entry space does not exist, [0064]: entry space searching unit 64 determines an inter-vehicle distance between adjacently disposed other vehicles V in front and rear directions, and may determine the presence or absence of the entry space 124 on the basis of a size relationship thereof with a preset threshold value, [0066]: In step S7, the countermeasure control unit 66 performs a countermeasure control to contend with merging into the merging destination lane 116 while automated driving is continued without interruption. The “countermeasure control”, for example, is [1] a control to cause the direction indicator 36 to emit light (first countermeasure), [2] a control to stop the host vehicle 100 (second countermeasure), [3] a steering angle directional control (third and fifth countermeasures), [4] a control to orient a vehicle body 130 (fourth countermeasure), or [5] a combination of the aforementioned respective controls, [0071]: In step S9, the countermeasure control unit 66 performs the merging control to cause the host vehicle 100 to enter into the entry space 124…trajectory generating unit 56 generates a travel trajectory, [0079]: stop position 128, [0080]: it is possible to cause the host vehicle 100 to wait in the pre-merging lane 106 until an entry space 124 is discovered).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Harada with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve driving convenience. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale and is included below.
As per claim(s) 2, Oh’636 discloses wherein the processor is configured to attempt to cut into a space between driving objects that exist in a target lane for merging during autonomous driving when the objects occupy a space of the target lane and the rear vehicle is not yielding in which lane change is to be performed (see at least [0105]: lane-change recognition unit 132 may determine whether the traveling lane and the target lane are congested based on whether each of the calculated first and second velocity flows is less than a critical value (S605), [0107]: Upon determining that the traveling lane and the target lane are congested (YES in S605), the path generation unit 134 may estimate a cut-in point of the preceding vehicle (S607), may determine a target point of the target lane from the estimated cut-in point (S608), and may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point (S610), [0111]: In the case in which the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield (YES in S613), the lane change may be performed, and the vehicle running control method may be finished (S614), [0113]: procedure may return to step S613 such that the danger-degree determination unit 138 determines whether the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield), but Oh does not explicitly disclose no space.
However, Harada teaches wherein the processor is configured to attempt to cut into a space between driving objects that exist in a target lane for merging during autonomous driving when the objects occupy a space of the target lane and there is no space in which lane change is to be performed (see at least [0063]: In step S6, the entry space searching unit 64 determines whether or not there is at least one entry space 124 for the host vehicle 100, [0065]: small space, [0066]: In step S7, the countermeasure control unit 66 performs a countermeasure control to contend with merging into the merging destination lane 116 while automated driving is continued without interruption. The “countermeasure control”, for example, is [1] a control to cause the direction indicator 36 to emit light (first countermeasure), [2] a control to stop the host vehicle 100 (second countermeasure), [3] a steering angle directional control (third and fifth countermeasures), [4] a control to orient a vehicle body 130 (fourth countermeasure), or [5] a combination of the aforementioned respective controls, [0071]: trajectory generating unit 56 generates a travel trajectory, [0072]: host vehicle 100 enters between the two other vehicles V1 and V2 (into the entry space 124) while the steering wheel is steered to the right).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Harada with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve driving convenience. The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 3, Oh’636 discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied when the vehicle is driving on a merging lane and objects driving on the target lane are at a low speed below a predetermined speed (see at least [0104]: first velocity flow may mean the average velocity of one or more vehicles located ahead of the host vehicle among the vehicles traveling in the traveling lane. The second velocity flow may mean the average velocity of one or more vehicles located within the detection range FR of the sensor unit 120 among the vehicles traveling in the target lane, [0105]: determine whether the traveling lane and the target lane are congested based on whether each of the calculated first and second velocity flows is less than a critical value (S605)).
As per claim(s) 18, Oh’636 discloses a vehicle path generating method comprising:
determining, by a processor, whether a cut-in activation condition is satisfied during autonomous driving (see at least [0019]: one or more processors, [0103]: autonomous traveling is performed (S601), );
in response to a determination that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied, setting a drivable region for cutting-in (see at least [0084]: may determine the position of an area A.sub.tar in which the safe distance is secured between the target vehicle V.sub.C and the rear approaching vehicle V.sub.D to be a target point P.sub.tar, [0085]: path generation unit 134 may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point P.sub.tar. Here, the cut-in path may be a traveling path in which the host vehicle V.sub.ego deviates toward the target point P.sub.tar, [0086]: velocity controller 136 may perform control to reduce the velocity of the host vehicle V.sub.ego to a first velocity v.sub.d calculated based on predetermined velocity information along the cut-in path, generated by the path generation unit 134, [0109]: may perform control such that the host vehicle travels while deviating toward the target point (S612). Here, the first velocity means the minimum movement velocity desired for the host vehicle to perform the lane change);
generating a cut-in path within the drivable region (see at least [0056]: upon determining that the host vehicle in the traveling lane enters the junction section…generate a cut-in path of the host vehicle, [0084]: may determine the position of an area A.sub.tar in which the safe distance is secured between the target vehicle V.sub.C and the rear approaching vehicle V.sub.D to be a target point P.sub.tar, [0085]: path generation unit 134 may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point P.sub.tar. Here, the cut-in path may be a traveling path in which the host vehicle V.sub.ego deviates toward the target point P.sub.tar, [0086]: velocity controller 136 may perform control to reduce the velocity of the host vehicle V.sub.ego to a first velocity v.sub.d calculated based on predetermined velocity information along the cut-in path, generated by the path generation unit 134, [0109]: may perform control such that the host vehicle travels while deviating toward the target point (S612). Here, the first velocity means the minimum movement velocity desired for the host vehicle to perform the lane change);
controlling a vehicle to follow the cut-in path (see at least [0086]: velocity controller 136 may perform control to reduce the velocity of the host vehicle V.sub.ego to a first velocity v.sub.d calculated based on predetermined velocity information along the cut-in path, generated by the path generation unit 134, [0109]: may perform control such that the host vehicle travels while deviating toward the target point (S612). Here, the first velocity means the minimum movement velocity desired for the host vehicle to perform the lane change, [0111]: In the case in which the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield (YES in S613), the lane change may be performed, and the vehicle running control method may be finished (S614)),
wherein the determining whether the cut-in activation condition is satisfied during autonomous driving includes determining that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied when there is no intention to yield by the rear approaching vehicle for performing lane change for the cutting-in (see at least [0105]: lane-change recognition unit 132 may determine whether the traveling lane and the target lane are congested based on whether each of the calculated first and second velocity flows is less than a critical value (S605), [0107]: Upon determining that the traveling lane and the target lane are congested (YES in S605), the path generation unit 134 may estimate a cut-in point of the preceding vehicle (S607), may determine a target point of the target lane from the estimated cut-in point (S608), and may generate a cut-in path to the determined target point (S610), [0111]: In the case in which the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield (YES in S613), the lane change may be performed, and the vehicle running control method may be finished (S614), [0113]: procedure may return to step S613 such that the danger-degree determination unit 138 determines whether the rear approaching vehicle has the intention to yield), but Oh does not explicitly disclose no space.
However, Harada teaches no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in (see at least abstract: perform a countermeasure control to contend with merging into the merging destination lane while continuing to automatically drive the host vehicle, in the event that a search result is obtained which indicates that an entry space does not exist, [0064]: entry space searching unit 64 determines an inter-vehicle distance between adjacently disposed other vehicles V in front and rear directions, and may determine the presence or absence of the entry space 124 on the basis of a size relationship thereof with a preset threshold value, [0066]: In step S7, the countermeasure control unit 66 performs a countermeasure control to contend with merging into the merging destination lane 116 while automated driving is continued without interruption. The “countermeasure control”, for example, is [1] a control to cause the direction indicator 36 to emit light (first countermeasure), [2] a control to stop the host vehicle 100 (second countermeasure), [3] a steering angle directional control (third and fifth countermeasures), [4] a control to orient a vehicle body 130 (fourth countermeasure), or [5] a combination of the aforementioned respective controls, [0071]: In step S9, the countermeasure control unit 66 performs the merging control to cause the host vehicle 100 to enter into the entry space 124…trajectory generating unit 56 generates a travel trajectory, [0079]: stop position 128, [0080]: it is possible to cause the host vehicle 100 to wait in the pre-merging lane 106 until an entry space 124 is discovered).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Harada with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve driving convenience. The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 19, Oh’636 discloses wherein the determining whether the cut-in activation condition is satisfied includes:
determining that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied when the vehicle is driving on a merging lane, there is no space available for lane change in a target lane for lane change, and objects driving on the target lane are at a low speed below a predetermined speed (see at least [0104]: first velocity flow may mean the average velocity of one or more vehicles located ahead of the host vehicle among the vehicles traveling in the traveling lane. The second velocity flow may mean the average velocity of one or more vehicles located within the detection range FR of the sensor unit 120 among the vehicles traveling in the target lane, [0105]: determine whether the traveling lane and the target lane are congested based on whether each of the calculated first and second velocity flows is less than a critical value (S605)).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh’636 in view of Harada, and further in view of US 20200050195 (“Gross”).
As per claim(s) 4, Oh’636 discloses wherein when the target lane for the cutting-in is a first lane and the vehicle is driving on a second lane (see at least claim 1: host vehicle in a traveling lane enters the junction section during autonomous traveling, Fig. 2: target lane, traveling lane), but does not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to set the drivable region using a right lane boundary of an own lane of the vehicle and a left lane boundary of the target lane.
However, Gross teaches the processor is configured to set the drivable region using a right lane boundary of an own lane of the vehicle and a left lane boundary of the target lane (see at least [0033]: If a lane change is desirable, the lane change detection system 122 is executed to define a region of interest proximate to the autonomous vehicle 100 (either directed toward the left or right side of the autonomous vehicle, depending on the intended lane change direction) and determine whether it is safe to maneuver the autonomous vehicle 100 into the destination lane based on sensor signal outputs received from the sensor systems 102-104, [0039]: regions of interest 300-400 are defined in proximity to the autonomous vehicle 100. The region of interest may be a grand piano-shaped region of interest 300 disposed along the rear and side of the autonomous vehicle 100 or it may be configured as an “S”-shaped region of interest 400 that encompasses the autonomous vehicle 100 and extends into the destination lane 302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Gross with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide safe autonomous vehicle maneuvering.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh’636 in view of Harada and Gross, and further in view of US 20210237769 (“Ostafew”).
As per claim(s) 5, Oh’636 discloses wherein when a first object and a second object driving in the target lane for the cutting-in exist, the processor is configured to set a boundary between the first object and the second object as a second left lane boundary (see at least [0084]: may determine the position of an area A.sub.tar in which the safe distance is secured between the target vehicle V.sub.C and the rear approaching vehicle V.sub.D to be a target point P.sub.tar) but does not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to set the left lane boundary of the target lane as a first left lane boundary, set a boundary between the first object and the second object as a second left lane boundary, and set a boundary between the second object and the vehicle as a third left lane boundary, to set the drivable region by using the right lane boundary of the own lane of the vehicle, the first left lane boundary, the second left lane boundary, and the third left lane boundary, and to set the first left lane boundary, the second left lane boundary, and the third left lane boundary to be continuously connected.
However, Gross teaches the processor is configured to set the left lane boundary of the target lane as a first left lane boundary, to set the drivable region by using the right lane boundary of the own lane of the vehicle, the first left lane boundary, a second left lane boundary, and a third left lane boundary, and to set a first left lane boundary, a second left lane boundary, and a third left lane boundary to be continuously connected (see at least [0033]: If a lane change is desirable, the lane change detection system 122 is executed to define a region of interest proximate to the autonomous vehicle 100 (either directed toward the left or right side of the autonomous vehicle, depending on the intended lane change direction) and determine whether it is safe to maneuver the autonomous vehicle 100 into the destination lane based on sensor signal outputs received from the sensor systems 102-104, [0039]: regions of interest 300-400 are defined in proximity to the autonomous vehicle 100. The region of interest may be a grand piano-shaped region of interest 300 disposed along the rear and side of the autonomous vehicle 100 or it may be configured as an “S”-shaped region of interest 400 that encompasses the autonomous vehicle 100 and extends into the destination lane 302).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Gross with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide safe autonomous vehicle maneuvering. The combination would yield predictable results.
However, Ostafew teaches the processor is configured to
set a boundary between the second object and the vehicle as a third left lane boundary, to set the drivable region by using the right lane boundary of the own lane of the vehicle, the first left lane boundary, the second left lane boundary, and the third left lane boundary, and to set the first left lane boundary, the second left lane boundary, and the third left lane boundary to be continuously connected (see at least [0147]: A view 960 of FIG. 9 illustrates adjusting (i.e., the operation 870) the discrete-time speed plan for dynamic objects, [0149]: An adjusted drivable area 964).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Ostafew with a reasonable expectation of success in order to determine a safe trajectory of the autonomous vehicle through an adjusted drivable area and for safe autonomous vehicle travel. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh’636 in view of Harada, and further in view of US 20210300351 (“Kumano”).
As per claim(s) 6, Oh’636 does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to generate a grid map of a region from rear of the vehicle to a merging point, and to mark and display a boundary of the drivable region on the grid map wherein a position of the drivable region on the grid map includes an index.
However, Kumano teaches wherein the processor is configured to generate a grid map of a region from rear of the vehicle to a merging point, and to mark and display a boundary of the drivable region on the grid map wherein a position of the drivable region on the grid map includes an index (see at least [0079]: FIG. 8 is a view showing the risk region RA determined by the risk potential p. As shown, in the risk region calculating part 144, the risk region RA is divided into a plurality of mesh squares (also referred to as grid squares), and the risk potential p is associated with each of the plurality of mesh squares. For example, the risk potential corresponds to the mesh square (x.sub.i, y.sub.j)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Kumano with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve safe driving of the vehicle. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh’636 in view of Harada, and further in view of US 20220126882 (“Oh‘882”).
As per claim(s) 7, Oh’636 does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle.
However, Oh’882 teaches wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle (see at least [0095] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a method of generating a predicted path of another vehicle and illustrates an example of a path along which a vehicle changes lanes in a symmetric form using a start point (the current position of another vehicle) and an end point (the position of another vehicle on a target lane line after T seconds) as control points that are relatively appropriate to lane change based on 5.sup.th Bezier curve).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Oh’882 with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an accurate predicted path of a lane change. The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 8, Oh’636 does not explicitly wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point.
However, Oh’882 teaches wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point (see at least [0095] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a method of generating a predicted path of another vehicle and illustrates an example of a path along which a vehicle changes lanes in a symmetric form using a start point (the current position of another vehicle) and an end point (the position of another vehicle on a target lane line after T seconds) as control points that are relatively appropriate to lane change based on 5.sup.th Bezier curve).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Oh’882 with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an accurate predicted path of a lane change.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh’636 in view of Harada, and further in view of Oh‘882 and US 20220089151 (“Gyllenhammar”).
As per claim(s) 20, Oh’636 discloses generating the cut-in path within the drivable region (see at least [0084]: may determine the position of an area A.sub.tar in which the safe distance is secured between the target vehicle V.sub.C and the rear approaching vehicle V.sub.D to be a target point P.sub.tar, [0085]: generate a cut-in path to the determined target point P.sub.tar) but does not explicitly disclose wherein generating the cut-in path within the drivable region includes: setting a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle;
generating a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point; and
determining whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane.
However, Oh’882 teaches setting a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle (see at least [0095] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a method of generating a predicted path of another vehicle and illustrates an example of a path along which a vehicle changes lanes in a symmetric form using a start point (the current position of another vehicle) and an end point (the position of another vehicle on a target lane line after T seconds) as control points that are relatively appropriate to lane change based on 5.sup.th Bezier curve);
generating a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point (see at least [0095] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a method of generating a predicted path of another vehicle and illustrates an example of a path along which a vehicle changes lanes in a symmetric form using a start point (the current position of another vehicle) and an end point (the position of another vehicle on a target lane line after T seconds) as control points that are relatively appropriate to lane change based on 5.sup.th Bezier curve).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Oh’882 with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an accurate predicted path of a lane change.
However, Gyllenhammar teaches determining whether a path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane (see at least [0040]: risk map provides input to find/identify path associated with the lowest risk value, [0075]: one may determine the area segment having the highest risk parameter intersected by each candidate path 48a, 48b in order to obtain a value of a highest risk zone entered by each candidate path).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Oh’636 by incorporating the teachings of Gyllenhammar with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase path safety.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art taken either individually or in combination with other prior art of record fails to disclose, suggest, teach, or render obvious the invention as a whole: Oh’822 discloses six points of a predicted trajectory for a lane change with predetermined distances (see at least Fig. 9) but does not explicitly disclose set the fifth point where the first Bezier curve does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length. Claim 9 is dependent upon Claims 1, 7, and 8. Claims 10-17 are dependent upon claim 9, wherein claims 12-15 are dependent upon claim 11 and claims 16-17 are dependent upon claim 15.
As per claim(s) 9, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length.
As per claim(s) 10, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane.
As per claim(s) 11, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point.
As per claim(s) 12, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to
determine whether the second Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
when the second Bezier curve path does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region the processor is configured to determine that there is no risk of collision between the vehicle and the object driving on the target lane, and to determine the fifth point as a target entry point into the target lane.
As per claim(s) 13, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to control the vehicle to drive on its own lane when the second Bezier curve path overlap the boundary of the drivable region.
As per claim(s) 14, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a cut-in path having a minimum curvature radius that is greater than a minimum turning radius of a vehicle based on the target entry point into the target lane.
As per claim(s) 15, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set a sixth point moving forward by a predetermined first length from the fifth point, a seventh point between the fifth point and the sixth point, and an eighth point between the third point and the fourth point, and
the processor is further configured to generate a third Bezier curve using the fifth point, the seventh, the eighth point, and the fourth point.
As per claim(s) 16, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set a sixth point moving forward by a predetermined first length from the fifth point, a seventh point between the fifth point and the sixth point, and an eighth point between the third point and the fourth point, and
the processor is further configured to generate a third Bezier curve using the fifth point, the seventh, the eighth point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to
compare a minimum curvature radius of each of one or more points included in the third Bezier curved line with a minimum turning radius of the vehicle, and
to determine that the third Bezier curve as a cut-in path when the minimum radii of curvature of the one or more points are all greater than the minimum turning radius of the vehicle.
As per claim(s) 17, A vehicle path generating apparatus comprising:
a processor; and
a storage configured to store data and algorithms, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
set a drivable region for cutting-in, to generate a cut-in path within the drivable region and in response a cut-in activation condition which is satisfied during autonomous driving of the vehicle, the processor configured to control a vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
when there is no space available for performing lane change for the cutting-in, the processor configured to determine that the cut-in activation condition is satisfied,
wherein the processor electrically connected to a steering apparatus of a vehicle configured to control a steering of the vehicle for the vehicle to follow the cut-in path,
wherein the processor is configured to set a first point moved forward by a predetermined first length from a current position of an object driving in a target lane for the cutting-in, a second point moved forward by a predetermined second length from the first point, a third point moved forward by the predetermined first length from a current position of the vehicle, and a fourth point, which is the current position of the vehicle,
wherein the processor is configured to generate a first Bezier curve path using the first point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set the fifth point where the first Bezier curved does not overlap the boundary of the drivable region by moving the first point forward at least once by a predetermined second length,
wherein the processor is configured to determine whether the first Bezier curve path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region to determine a risk of collision between the vehicle and an object driving on the target lane,
wherein when the first Bezier curved path overlaps the boundary of the drivable region,
the processor is configured to
set a fifth point by moving the first point forward by the second length, and to
generate a second Bezier curved path using the fifth point, the second point, the third point, and the fourth point,
wherein the processor is configured to set a sixth point moving forward by a predetermined first length from the fifth point, a seventh point between the fifth point and the sixth point, and an eighth point between the third point and the fourth point, and
the processor is further configured to generate a third Bezier curve using the fifth point, the seventh, the eighth point, and the fourth point,
wherein when at least one point having a minimum curvature radius that is smaller than the minimum turning radius of the vehicle exists among the one or more points, the processor is configured to change the seventh point and the eight point to generate a fourth Bezier curve using the changed points, and to compare a minimum radius of curvature of the fourth Bezier curve with the minimum turning radius of the vehicle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELINA M SHUDY whose telephone number is (571)272-6757. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10am - 6pm.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
Angelina Shudy
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/Angelina M Shudy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668