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 .
Status of claims
Claims 1 and 9 are amended.
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Response to arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 12/12/2025; Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant remarks:
Regarding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, Applicant argues that the amendment claim’s additional elements integrate the judicial exception into practical application.
Regarding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102, Levinson does not teach “latency buffer” as amendment claims. Regarding rejection under 35 U.S.C 103, neither Irie nor Levenson teach- latency buffer.
Office Response:
Amendment claim overcomes 35 U.S.C. 101 rejejction.
Amendment claims with “latency buffer” are mapped with a new prior art (see below).
With respect to the claim rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103, applicants “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant has amended the independent claim and these amendments have changed the scope of the original application and the Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot. However, even though applicant has amended the scope of the claims and the Office has provided new mapping of cited prior art below, the Office is still using most of the same cited prior art, thus the Office will attempt to address all remarks that remain relevant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9-16 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 9 recites” delayer” for delaying said data until a third time”, “adjuster” for adjusting said data in accordance with said first time and said second time”, ”relocalizer “coupled to said vehicle to adjust said trajectory”… The limitations are unclear to the examiner what applicant means by “delayer, adjuster and relocalizer, are those hardware? Or software?
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent on the rejected claims and for failing to cure the deficiencies listed above.
Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 9 recites” delayer”….. ”adjuster”.. ”relocalizer”… Those limitations are not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art what these components are. For example, it is not clear whether these components are hardware or software.
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as being dependent on rejected claim(s) and for failing to cure the deficiencies listed above.
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.
Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over CN 108700876 A to Levinson et al (herein after “Levinson”) in view of US 20200339152 A1 to Inoue et al. (here in after “Inoue”).
Regarding claim 1, Levinson discloses A method for remotely operating a vehicle by a driver comprising the steps of: ( See Levinson autonomous vehicle 130)
gathering vehicle state data from sensors coupled to a vehicle at a first time(see Levinson para[0069] The locator 368 is configured to receive sensor data from one or more sources, such as GPS data 352, wheel data, IMU data 354, LIDAR data 346a, camera data 340a, radar data 348a, etc., as well as reference data 339 (e.g., 3D map data and route data):
sending said data to a driver station (See Levinson station 190);
receiving said data at a second time (See Levinson para[0148] Diagram 3600 depicts teleoperator manager 3607 generating data configured to guide generation of a trajectory at autonomous vehicle 3630 , where guidance provided by teleoperator manager 3607 facilitates navigation of autonomous vehicle 3630)
receiving navigation from a driver; (See Levinson para[0148] Diagram 3600 depicts teleoperator manager 3607 generating data configured to guide generation of a trajectory at autonomous vehicle 3630 , where guidance provided by teleoperator manager 3607 facilitates navigation of autonomous vehicle 3630);
Computing a trajectory in accordance with said adjusted data and said navigation(See Levinson paras[0004] ,[0062]):
transmitting said trajectory to said vehicle (See Levinson para[0057] Autonomous vehicle service platform 101 may dispatch an autonomous vehicle from station 190 to geographic location 119 , or may transfer an autonomous vehicle 109 c that is already in transit (eg, without passengers) to service the transportation request of user 102);
relocalizing said trajectory (See Levinson para[0062] the structure and/or functionality of autonomous vehicle 130 and /or autonomous vehicle controller 147 and its components may enable real-time (or near real-time) trajectory calculations to enable autonomous vehicle 109 to self-drive through autonomy-related operations, such as localization and perception.);
However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach delaying said data in a latency buffer until a third time, adjusting said data in accordance with said first. second and third times, instructing said vehicle to follow said trajectory. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Inoue teaches delaying said data in a latency buffer until a third time (See Inoue Abstract A vehicle travel control device executes trajectory following control to make the vehicle follow a target trajectory. A delay time represents control delay of the trajectory following control. A delay compensation time is at least a part of the delay time. The trajectory following control includes: displacement estimation processing that estimates a displacement of the vehicle in the delay compensation time; and delay compensation processing that corrects a deviation between the vehicle and the target trajectory based on the estimated displacement to compensate the control delay.)
adjusting said data in accordance with said first. second and third times, (See Inoue dara adjustment unit 112, see para 3-3-2 Data Adjustment processing)
instructing said vehicle to follow said trajectory (See Inoue para[0096] As a result, it is possible to make the vehicle 1 travel to follow the target trajectory TR).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Inoue’s vehicle travel control device by delay time that control delay of the trajectory following control in order to allow to provide a technique that can suppress decrease in the trajectory following performance of the trajectory following control (see Inoue para[0008]).
Regarding claim 9, Levinson discloses A system for remotely operating a vehicle by a driver comprising:
vehicle state data gathered by sensors coupled to a vehicle at a first time; (see Levinson para[0069] The locator 368 is configured to receive sensor data from one or more sources, such as GPS data 352, wheel data, IMU data 354, LIDAR data 346a, camera data 340a, radar data 348a, etc., as well as reference data 339 (e.g., 3D map data and route data):
sender for transmitting said data to a driver station; (See Levinson station 190);
receiver for receiving said data at a second time (See Levinson para[0148] Diagram 3600 depicts teleoperator manager 3607 generating data configured to guide generation of a trajectory at autonomous vehicle 3630 , where guidance provided by teleoperator manager 3607 facilitates navigation of autonomous vehicle 3630)
controls coupled to said driver station receiving a navigation driver (See Levinson para[0148] Diagram 3600 depicts teleoperator manager 3607 generating data configured to guide generation of a trajectory at autonomous vehicle 3630 , where guidance provided by teleoperator manager 3607 facilitates navigation of autonomous vehicle 3630);;
computer to compute a trajectory using said navigation and said adjusted data (See Levinson paras[0004] ,[0062]):
transmitter for transmitting said trajectory to said vehicle (See Levinson para[0057] Autonomous vehicle service platform 101 may dispatch an autonomous vehicle from station 190 to geographic location 119 , or may transfer an autonomous vehicle 109 c that is already in transit (eg, without passengers) to service the transportation request of user 102);
relocalizer coupled to said vehicle to adjust said trajectory (See Levinson para[0062] the structure and/or functionality of autonomous vehicle 130 and /or autonomous vehicle controller 147 and its components may enable real-time (or near real-time) trajectory calculations to enable autonomous vehicle 109 to self-drive through autonomy-related operations, such as localization and perception.);
However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach delaying said data in a latency buffer until a third time, adjusting said data in accordance with said first. second and third times, instructing said vehicle to follow said trajectory. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Inoue teaches delayer for delaying said data until a third time; (See Inoue Abstract A vehicle travel control device executes trajectory following control to make the vehicle follow a target trajectory. A delay time represents control delay of the trajectory following control. A delay compensation time is at least a part of the delay time. The trajectory following control includes: displacement estimation processing that estimates a displacement of the vehicle in the delay compensation time; and delay compensation processing that corrects a deviation between the vehicle and the target trajectory based on the estimated displacement to compensate the control delay.)
adjuster for adjusting said data in accordance with said first time and said second time; (See Inoue dara adjustment unit 112, see para 3-3-2 Data Adjustment processing)
instructor directing said vehicle to follow said adjusted trajectory (See Inoue para[0096] As a result, it is possible to make the vehicle 1 travel to follow the target trajectory TR).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Inoue’s vehicle travel control device by delay time that control delay of the trajectory following control in order to allow to provide a technique that can suppress decrease in the trajectory following performance of the trajectory following control (see Inoue para[0008]).
Claims 3-8,10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over CN 108700876 A to Levinson et al (herein after “Levinson”) in view of US 20200339152 A1 to Inoue et al. (here in after “Inoue”) and JP2009262837 A to Yoshiro Irie (herein after “Irie”).
Regarding claim 3, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. Levinson discloses wherein said relocalizing further includes: measuring movement of said vehicle; (see Levinson localizer 368, localization data, see Levinson para[0069] According to some examples, localizer 368 can generate or update the pose or position of any autonomous vehicle in real time or near real time).
However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach adjusting said trajectory according to said movement. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Irie teaches adjusting said trajectory according to said movement (see Irie para[0016]In the present invention, in response to the above-mentioned conflicting demands, focusing on the fact that there may be differences in the way the driver feels discomfort due to "control intervention in the driver's driving by the autonomous driving control device" in the longitudinal and lateral directions of the vehicle, it is expected that by separately adjusting the magnitude of control by the autonomous driving control device that adjusts the vehicle's behavior and position in the longitudinal and lateral directions).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Irie’s adjusting said trajectory according to said movement in order to allow to reduce the driver's discomfort due to the above-mentioned control intervention as much as possible while at the same time bringing the vehicle's driving trajectory closer to the ideal trajectory (see Irie para[0016]).
Regarding claim 4, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. Levinson teaches wherein said measuring further includes: using an inertial measurement unit (see Levinson para[0066] such as an inertial measurement unit, or “IMU,” a global positioning system (“GPS”) sensor).
Regarding claim 5, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. Levinson teaches wherein said measuring further includes: using a GNSS receiver. (see Levinson para[0069] The locator 368 is configured to receive sensor data from one or more sources, such as GPS data 352; see Levinson para[0066] such a global positioning system (“GPS”) sensor).
Regarding claim 6, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach wherein said receiving further includes: obtaining lateral information from said driver; and obtaining longitudinal information from said driver. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Irie teaches wherein said receiving further includes: obtaining lateral information from said driver; and obtaining longitudinal information from said driver (see Irie para[0032] Further, the actual acceleration/deceleration Gsx may be a value obtained from a longitudinal acceleration sensor 64 provided on the vehicle;para[0021] lateral acceleration Gy detected by lateral acceleration sensor 66).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Irie’s adjusting said trajectory according to said movement in order to allow to reduce the driver's discomfort due to the above-mentioned control intervention as much as possible while at the same time bringing the vehicle's driving trajectory closer to the ideal trajectory (see Irie para[0016]).
Regarding claim 7, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. Levinson teaches wherein said measuring further includes: using wheel odometry (see Levinson para[0074] one or more odometry sensors 477 (e.g., wheel encoder sensors, wheel speed sensors, etc.).
Regarding claim 8, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 1. Levinson teaches wherein said measuring further includes: Using camera odometry (see Levinson para[0114] camera image data from one or more cameras 2574).
Regarding claim 10, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. Levinson teaches wherein said data further includes: images images (see Levinson para[0066] The sensors shown in diagram 300 include an image capture sensor 340 (e.g., any type of light capture device or camera); and vehicle telemetry (see Levinson para[0093] In some cases, telemetry data and a set of candidate trajectories may accompany the request. Examples of telemetry data include sensor data, localized data, perception data, etc; ).
Regarding claim 11, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach wherein said relocalizer further includes: Measurer to measure movement of said vehicle, and Adjusting said trajectory according to said movement. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Irie teaches wherein said relocalizer further includes: Measurer to measure movement of said vehicle (See Irie para[0002] appropriately avoid them or warn the driver to maintain an appropriate distance from the vehicle in front, or control the running and movement of the vehicle (ACC).)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Irie’s adjusting said trajectory according to said movement in order to allow to reduce the driver's discomfort due to the above-mentioned control intervention as much as possible while at the same time bringing the vehicle's driving trajectory closer to the ideal trajectory (see Irie para[0016]).
However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach adjusting said trajectory according to said movement. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Inoue teaches adjusting said trajectory according to said movement(See Inoue dara adjustment unit 112, see para 3-3-2 Data Adjustment processing).
Regarding claim 12, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. Levinson teaches wherein said measurer further includes: an inertial measurement unit (see Levinson para[0066] such as an inertial measurement unit, or “IMU,” a global positioning system (“GPS”) sensor).
Regarding claim 13, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. Levinson teaches wherein said measurer further includes: a GNSS receiver (see Levinson para[0069] The locator 368 is configured to receive sensor data from one or more sources, such as GPS data 352; see Levinson para[0066] such a global positioning system (“GPS”) sensor).
Regarding claim 14, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. However, Levinson does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach wherein said controls further include: one or more lateral sensors; and one or more longitudinal sensors. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention, Irie teaches wherein said controls further include: one or more lateral sensors; and one or more longitudinal sensors (see Irie para[0021] longitudinal acceleration sensor 64, lateral acceleration Gy detected by lateral acceleration sensor 66,).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Levinson’s remote-control system and method for autonomous vehicle trajectory modification with Irie’s adjusting said trajectory according to said movement in order to allow to reduce the driver's discomfort due to the above-mentioned control intervention as much as possible while at the same time bringing the vehicle's driving trajectory closer to the ideal trajectory (see Irie para[0016]).
Regarding claim 15, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. Levinson teaches wherein said measurer further includes: a wheel odometry sensor (see Levinson para[0114] camera image data from one or more cameras 2574).
Regarding claim 16, Levinson and Inoue remain applied as claim 9. Levinson teaches wherein said measurer further includes: A camera odometry sensor (see Levinson para[0114] camera image data from one or more cameras 2574).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZIA AFRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-6.
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, Scott A Browne can be reached at 5712700151. 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.
/NAZIA AFRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666