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 . 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5, line 3, the phrase “to made” should be amended “to make”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-14 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Puttagunta et al. (US 2016/0121912 A1).
Referring to Claim 1: Puttagunta discloses a signal aspect enforcement method for a rail vehicle with an unknown position, the method comprising:
determining, by an on-board controller on the rail vehicle, a position of the rail vehicle (Para. [0081]);
determining, by the on-board controller (PTCC), whether a first signal aspect (from VA) for a signal matches a second signal aspect (from DAP) for the signal (Para. [0169]); and
determining, by the on-board controller, at least one of a route of the rail vehicle (Para. [0170]) or a speed limit (Para. [0114]) of the rail vehicle when the first signal aspect matches the second signal aspect (Para. [0192-0197]) (Fig. 8),
wherein:
the first signal aspect is determined from first data from a first system (VA) on the rail vehicle (Para. [0105] and [0142]), and
the second signal aspect is determined from second data from a second system (DAP or GPS or VCD) on the rail vehicle (Para. [0081] or [0087] or [0074]), which system is different from the first system used to determine the first signal aspect (Fig. 2).
Referring to Claim 2: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
the first system (VA) is one of a camera system on the rail vehicle, a beacon/radio system on the rail vehicle, a LiDAR system on the rail vehicle, or a radar system on the rail vehicle (Para. [0142]), and
the second system (VCD) is one of a camera system on the rail vehicle, a beacon/radio system on the rail vehicle (Para. [0169], last two sentences), a LiDAR system on the rail vehicle, or a radar system on the rail vehicle, which system is different from the first system (Para. [0197]).
Referring to Claim 3: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein: data from the camera system (VA) is used to determine the first signal aspect (Para. [0105]), the camera system being a stereo camera system or multi-camera system (Para. [0142] and [0176-0177]), and data from the LiDAR system or the radar system (VCD) is used to determine the second signal aspect (Para. [0169], last two sentences) (Para. [0196-0197]).
Referring to Claim 4: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the first data (via VA) includes a first identification of the signal (Para. [0105]), the method further comprising using the on-board controller (PTCC) to make a first determination of the position of the rail vehicle using the first identification of the signal (Para. [0155-0167]).
Referring to Claim 5: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the second data (via VCD) includes a second identification of the signal (Para. [0196-0197]), the method further comprising using the on-board controller to made a second determination of the position of the rail vehicle using the second identification of the signal (Para. [0169], last two sentences).
Referring to Claim 8: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein at least two of the camera system (VA, Para. [0142]), the beacon/radio system (VCD, Para. [0169], last two sentences)), the LiDAR system (VA, Para. [0154]), and the radar system (VA, Para. [0142]) on the rail vehicle are used to extract at least two rail tracks, the at least two rail tracks including a first track that the rail vehicle occupies (track ID, Para. [0025]) (Fig. 6) and a second track nearby the first track (Para. [0105]).
Referring to Claim 9: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein data from the camera system (VA, Para. [0142]), data from the LiDAR system (VA, Para. [0154]), and data from the radar system (VA, Para. [0142]) are used to generate a map (Para. [0169], “The PTCC may use images provided by the VA module with position information from the GPS module to prepare map information provided to the operator via the user interface of the HMI module”), the map including:
a location of the signal on the map (Para. [0195]), and
an ego track (track ID) the rail vehicle is on (Para. [0025]) (Fig. 6) (claim 16).
Referring to Claim 10: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the on-board controller (PTCC) cross checks the generated location of the signal against a stored signal location, and raises an alarm if the generated location of the signal does not match the stored signal location (Para. [0233] and [0277]).
Referring to Claim 11: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the on-board controller (PTCC) uses data from the camera system (VA or PTC vision system) to determine the first signal aspect (Para. [0200]) (Fig. 4).
Referring to Claim 12: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the on-board controller (PTCC) uses data from the beacon/radio system to determine the second signal aspect (Para. [0196-0197]).
Referring to Claim 13: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the on-board controller (PTCC) accepts a signal aspect only if the first signal aspect based on the data from the camera system (VA or PTC vision system) and the second signal aspect based on the data from the beacon/radio system match, and the signal aspect is a valid aspect in a database (Para. [0195-0198]).
Referring to Claim 14: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 2, wherein: data from the camera system (VA or PTC vision system) includes an identification of the signal, an ego track, a nearby track, and an extracted path (trajectory) (Para. [0105]), and the on-board controller (PTCC) uses the identification of the signal, the ego track, the nearby track, and the extracted path (trajectory) (Para. [0046]) together with a map to determine the position of the rail vehicle (Para. [0169]).
Referring to Claim 18: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the on-board controller (PTCC) determines an ego track the rail vehicle is on, and an association of the ego track with the signal (Para. [0105]).
Referring to Claim 19: Puttagunta discloses signal aspect enforcement method for a rail vehicle, the method comprising:
determining, by an on-board controller (PTCC), whether a first signal aspect for a signal matches a second signal aspect for the signal (Para. [0194-0197]); and
determining, by the on-board controller, at least one of a route of the rail vehicle or a speed limit of the rail vehicle when the first signal aspect matches the second signal aspect (Para. [0249]),
wherein:
the first signal aspect (via VA) is determined from first data from a first system on the rail vehicle (Para. [0105] and [0142]), and
the second signal aspect is determined from second data from a second system
(DAP or GPS or VCD) on the rail vehicle (Para. [0081] or [0087] or [0074]), which system is different from the first system used to determine the first signal aspect (Fig. 2).
Referring to Claim 20: Puttagunta discloses the method of claim 19, wherein:
the first system (VA) is one of a camera system on the rail vehicle, a beacon/radio system on the rail vehicle, a LiDAR system on the rail vehicle, or a radar system on the rail vehicle (Para. [0142]), and
the second system (VCD) is one of a camera system on the rail vehicle, a beacon/radio system on the rail vehicle (Para. [0169], last two sentences), a LiDAR system on the rail vehicle, or a radar system on the rail vehicle, which system is different from the first system (Para. [0197]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7 and 15-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 6, the prior art fails to teach the specific combination of limitations recited regarding the LiDAR and radar systems used to generate third and fourth identifications of the symbol, respectively, and providing a position only if the first second, third and fourth determination of the position all match within certain predefined tolerance. Puttagunta fails to teach this specific arrangement and use of first through fourth sensors. Another reference, WO 2019/0649209 A2, teaches that it is known to determine the position of a rail vehicle using data from first and second radar and LiDAR sensors, respectively (Para [000221]). However, Examiner finds that it would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning to modify Puttagunta in view of WO 2019/0649209 A2, to meet the claimed limitations, specifically the condition that a position is only provided when all four determinations match within a predefined tolerance.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art fails to teach the specific combination of limitations recited regarding the camera, beacon/radio, LiDAR and radar systems, and providing a position only if all the position determinations match within a predefined tolerance. Puttagunta fails to teach this specific arrangement and use of sensors. Another reference, WO 2019/0649209 A2, teaches that it is known to determine the position of a rail vehicle using data from first and second radar and LiDAR sensors, respectively (Para [000221]). However, Examiner finds that it would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning to modify Puttagunta in view of WO 2019/0649209 A2, to meet the claimed limitations, specifically the condition that a position is only determined when all four (or five) positions match within a predefined tolerance.
Regarding claim 15 and depending claim 16, the prior art fails to teach that “the on-board controller uses data from the camera system to determine a first along-tracks distance to the signal, uses data from the beacon/radio system to determine a second along-tracks distance to the signal, uses data from the LiDAR system to determine a third along-tracks distance to the signal, and uses data from the radar system to determine a fourth along-tracks distance to the signal,” as recited in claim 15. While Puttagunta teaches that the PTCC module and VA module may be used to identify the distance to tracks objects and/or infrastructure (Para. [0155-0157]), Examiner finds that it would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning to modify Puttagunta to meet these specific limitations of determining the distance to the signal using four systems.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art fails to teach “receiving a speed measurement from a speed measuring device by the on-board controller, and determining a first speed of the rail vehicle; determining if the first speed is less than a predetermined line-of-sight threshold speed; receiving a grade measurement from a grade measuring device by the on-board controller and determining a first grade of a rail on which the rail vehicle is traveling; determining a worst-case braking distance of the rail vehicle using the first speed and the first grade; and outputting a brake request from the on-board controller when the first speed is greater than the predetermined line-of-sight threshold speed,” as recited in claim 17. While Puttagunta teaches that the PTCC module and VA module may be used to initiate automatic braking and speed control (Para. [0030] [0170]), Examiner finds that it would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning to modify Puttagunta to meet these specific limitations of determining a worst-case braking distance using the first speed and the first grade.
Conclusion
The references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the reference relate to the state of the art in rail vision systems that detect signal aspects: US-11866080-B2, US-9434397-B2, US-9731738-B2, US-8214091-B2, US-5978718-A and US-20210114634-A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY L KUHFUSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00am to 6:00 pm CDT.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6682. 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.
/ZACHARY L KUHFUSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615A
Prosecution Insights