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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 11/20/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 6-7, 9-10, 12-17, and 20-30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cheng et al. (US 2018/0365909 A1 herein Cheng) as modified by Roessler et al. (US 2018/0090009 A1 herein Roessler).
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 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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 9-10, 12-17, 20-23, 24-28, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2018/0365909 A1 herein Cheng), and further in view of Roessler et al. (US 2018/0090009 A1 herein Roessler).
Regarding claim 1, Cheng teaches a method of wireless communication comprising:
transmitting, by a first device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on- demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (read as first wireless communication device 202 may transmit a request for sensor sharing 208 via unicast signaling to the second wireless communication device 204, broadcast signaling, or some other form of signaling; first wireless communication device 202 may determine that an object, such as a vehicle, is blocking a field-of-view (FOV) of the first wireless communication device 202; first wireless communication device 202 may attempt to obtain sensor information from at least one other device that may be able to sense the blocked FOV or provide other information of interest) (Cheng - [0045]).
However, Cheng fails to teach in response to transmitting the SSM, receiving, by the first device from a second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, teaches in response to transmitting the SSM, receiving, by the first device from a second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as the received sensor data may be an on-demand sensor data that is received in response to sensing a demand or a request (e.g., by the receiving device 101A) to the sending devices) (Roessler – [0086]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Roessler into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of collecting first and second sets of data that may be combined for determining a current vehicle traffic configuration and monitoring and/or controlling components, systems or subsystems of a vehicle traffic component, and more particularly to a dynamic traffic guide based on vehicle to vehicle (V2V) sensor sharing method.
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches comprising, based on receiving the extension request, determining, by the first device, whether one or more extension response criteria for transmission of an extension response are satisfied (read as determine whether device is able to meet a response criterion specified by the request for sensor sharing 208) (Cheng - [0047]).
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches comprising transmitting the extension response indicating the extension data based on determining that the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied (read as determine whether device is able to meet a response criterion specified by the request for sensor sharing 208; if a response is warranted, a module for sending a response 222 may send the response with sensor information 210) (Cheng - [0047]-[0048]).
Regarding claim 9 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein determining whether the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied is based on a priority element indicated by the extension request (read as response transmission schedule based on the index and schedule or prioritize or based on time domain) (Cheng - [0129]).
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein determining whether the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied is based on a number of extension requests received by the first device and indicating the first object (read as number or requesters) (Cheng - [0125]).
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches comprising: selecting, by the first device, a transmission mode for an extension response indicating the extension data; and transmitting, by the first device, the extension response based on the transmission mode (read as unicast link; unicast signaling, unicast model 600) (Cheng - Figure 6, [0038], [0045], [0099]).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 12, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the transmission mode corresponds to a unicast transmission mode (read as unicast link; unicast signaling, unicast model 600) (Cheng - Figure 6, [0038], [0045], [0099]).
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 12, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the transmission mode corresponds to broadcast or groupcast transmission mode, and wherein the first device transmits the extension response to the second device and to one or more other devices (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link) (Cheng - [0038]).
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches comprising receiving one or more other extension requests from the one or more other devices, wherein the first device selects the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode based on a number of extension requests indicating the first object (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link; large number of requesters) (Cheng - [0038], [0125]).
Regarding claim 16 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the first device selects the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode based on determining that that the second device and the one or more other devices are within a particular range of one another (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link; the vehicle selects the communication parameters to use to communicate the response efficiently; different types of sensor information may be requested depending on whether the devices are close to one another or far from one another such as based on a comparison of the distance between the devices to one or more thresholds) (Cheng - [0038], [0125], [0202]).
Regarding claim 17 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the first device transmits the SSM using a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and based on a unicast transmission mode, and further comprising selecting a second MCS for transmission of the extension response based on the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode (read as customizing the transmission response may involve customizing the channel, the modulation/coding, the modulation and coding scheme/resource blocks (MCS/RBs)) (Cheng - [0111]).
Regarding claim 20, Cheng teaches an apparatus comprising:
a transmitter configured to transmit (read as transmitter 1414) (Cheng - [0169], [0182]-[0183]), from a first device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on- demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (read as first wireless communication device 202 may transmit a request for sensor sharing 208 via unicast signaling to the second wireless communication device 204, broadcast signaling, or some other form of signaling; first wireless communication device 202 may determine that an object, such as a vehicle, is blocking a field-of-view (FOV) of the first wireless communication device 202; first wireless communication device 202 may attempt to obtain sensor information from at least one other device that may be able to sense the blocked FOV or provide other information of interest) (Cheng - [0045]); and
a receiver configured to receive (read as receiver 1416) (Cheng - [0169], [0213]), in response to transmitting the SSM.
However, Cheng fails to teach to receive an extension request from a second device for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Roessler teaches to receive an extension request from a second device for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as the received sensor data may be an on-demand sensor data that is received in response to sensing a demand or a request (e.g., by the receiving device 101A) to the sending devices) (Roessler – [0086]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Roessler into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of collecting first and second sets of data that may be combined for determining a current vehicle traffic configuration and monitoring and/or controlling components, systems or subsystems of a vehicle traffic component, and more particularly to a dynamic traffic guide based on vehicle to vehicle (V2V) sensor sharing method.
Regarding claim 21 as applied to claim 20, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the first device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as apparatus 1400 could embody or be implemented within a vehicle) (Cheng - Figure 14, [0167]).
Regarding claim 22 as applied to claim 20, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the second device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as apparatus 1400 could embody or be implemented within a vehicle) (Cheng - Figure 14, [0167]).
Regarding claim 23 as applied to claim 21, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the first object corresponds to a vehicle, a vulnerable road user (VRU), or an obstacle (read as first vehicle 114) (Cheng - Figure 1, [0038]).
Regarding claim 24, Cheng teaches a method of wireless communication, comprising:
receiving, from a first device and by a second device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on-demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (read as first wireless communication device 202 may transmit a request for sensor sharing 208 via unicast signaling to the second wireless communication device 204, broadcast signaling, or some other form of signaling; first wireless communication device 202 may determine that an object, such as a vehicle, is blocking a field-of-view (FOV) of the first wireless communication device 202; first wireless communication device 202 may attempt to obtain sensor information from at least one other device that may be able to sense the blocked FOV or provide other information of interest) (Cheng - [0045]).
However, Cheng fails to teach in response to receiving the SSM, transmitting, to the first device by the second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Roessler teaches in response to receiving the SSM, transmitting, to the first device by the second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as the received sensor data may be an on-demand sensor data that is received in response to sensing a demand or a request (e.g., by the receiving device 101A) to the sending devices) (Roessler – [0086]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Roessler into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of collecting first and second sets of data that may be combined for determining a current vehicle traffic configuration and monitoring and/or controlling components, systems or subsystems of a vehicle traffic component, and more particularly to a dynamic traffic guide based on vehicle to vehicle (V2V) sensor sharing method.
Regarding claim 25 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches comprising receiving, from the first device based on the extension request, an extension response indicating the extension data (read as extended service set (ESS); extended sensors (e.g., sensor sharing); Vehicle A discovers Vehicle B's position, capability, and sensors to share; which may involve use of objects (e.g., extended objects) in the BSM/CAM and/or other messages which may be used for requests) (Cheng - [0041], [0092], [0132]).
Regarding claim 26 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the second device transmits the extension request to the first device based on determining that the extension data is to be used in connection with one or more of a maneuver of the second device or trajectory planning of the second device (read as location, speed, direction, path, etc.; Zone/Direction of interest) (Cheng - [0145], [0163]).
Regarding claim 27 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the second device transmits the extension request to at least one other device (read as device B 604 may transmit a BSM/CAM 606, or any other periodic broadcast messages known to nearby vehicles and/or devices) (Cheng - [0100]).
Regarding claim 28 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the extension request includes a priority element indicating a priority associated with the extension request (read as response transmission schedule based on the index and schedule or prioritize or based on time domain) (Cheng - [0129]).
Regarding claim 29, Cheng teaches an apparatus comprising:
a receiver configured to receive (read as receiver 1416) (Cheng - [0169], [0213]), from a first device and by a second device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on-demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (Cheng - [0054]); and
a transmitter configured to transmit (read as transmitter 1414) (Cheng - [0169], [0182]-[0183]).
However, Cheng fails to teach to transmit from the second device to the first device in response to receiving the SSM, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Roessler teaches to transmit from the second device to the first device in response to receiving the SSM, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as the received sensor data may be an on-demand sensor data that is received in response to sensing a demand or a request (e.g., by the receiving device 101A) to the sending devices) (Roessler – [0086]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Roessler into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of collecting first and second sets of data that may be combined for determining a current vehicle traffic configuration and monitoring and/or controlling components, systems or subsystems of a vehicle traffic component, and more particularly to a dynamic traffic guide based on vehicle to vehicle (V2V) sensor sharing method.
Regarding claim 30 as applied to claim 29, Cheng as modified by Roessler further teaches wherein the first object corresponds to a vehicle (read as first vehicle 114) (Cheng - Figure 1, [0038]), a vulnerable road user (VRU), or an obstacle, wherein the first device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network, and wherein the second device corresponds to an OBU of a vehicle, an RSU, or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 8, 11, and 18-19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL GUZMAN GONZALES whose telephone number is (571)270-1101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm EST. The examiner’s email address is April.guzman@uspto.gov.
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, Wesley L. Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/APRIL G GONZALES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648