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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-4 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on merits.
Information disclosure statement has been filed and reviewed by examiner
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the drawings (Figs. 1 and 2) are vague, the texts/labels are not clear and are not readable. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-4 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.
In claim 1, the recited limitation “the set composed of a slop” in line 8, “the geographical position” in line 10, “the basis of said augmented map” and “the basis of an estimate” in lines 16-17, “the energy required “in line 17, and “the moment it was determined” in line 33 are indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Furthermore, claim 1 and 2 recite “if” statements through the claim set. The if statements do not necessitate the limitation in the claim and examiner suggest amending the if statements to recite “when”. For example, examiner suggest amending “if the connection quality parameter to the wireless communication network is less than the minimum value” to “when the connection quality parameter to the wireless communication network is less than the minimum value” and the same applies to all the “if” limitations.
In claim 2, the recited limitation “sufficient time has elapsed to allow the land vehicle to reach said first environment” is indefinite. It is unclear to the examiner how this is connected to either previous limitation or following limitation is it supposed to be “and sufficient time has elapsed….”? Further, the recited limitation “the opposite basis” is indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 3, the recited limitation “a slope of said territories” in line 6 is indefinite. It is unclear to the examiner if this is referring to the slope recited previously or is a different slope.
Claim 4 is rejected for being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teague (US 20180017973 A1) in view of Fasola et al (US 20200408557 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Teague discloses a method of controlling path following by a self-driving land vehicle (see at least [0026]), a microprocessor unit functionally coupled to the memory and configured to connect to a wireless communication network when available (see at least [Fig. 3]), in which said augmented map comprises connection quality parameter to said wireless communication network in correspondence with said territories (see at least [0065, [0090, and [0118-0119]), and information on a characteristic of said territories chosen in the set composed of a slope of said territories and a presence of obstacles insurmountable by the land vehicle (see at least [0069] and [0076]), a location sensor functionally configured to provide said microprocessor unit with a signal of the geographical position of the land vehicle (see at least [figure 3]), an electric motor configured to move the land vehicle and at a supply battery configured to power the electric motor (see at least [0054] and [Fig. 3]), said method comprising the following operations: storing in said memory information of a planned path that said land vehicle must follow from a place of departure to a place of arrival identified on said map (see at least [0061] and [0121]); choosing with said microprocessor unit a path that the land vehicle can follow to move train a given starting point to a given arrival point on the basic of said map (see at least [0070-0072], [0107], and [0129]), on the basis of an estimate of the energy required to complete the chosen path and on the basis of a detected charge level of the land vehicle supply battery (see at least [0070-0072], [0107], and [0129]); performing with said microprocessor unit an autonomous navigation procedure from the place of departure to the place of arrival (see at least [0061]), comprising the following operations: a) during the autonomous navigation of the land vehicle along the planned path, checking with said microprocessor unit if the land vehicle is in an area in which said connection quality parameter to the wireless communication network is less than a minimum value (see at least [0061], [0065], [0088], [0122], [Fig. 5], and [Fig. 8]); b) if the connection quality parameter to the wireless communication network is less than the minimum value checking with said microprocessor unit if it is possible to continue autonomously along the planned path and repeating the operation a) (see at least [0088] and [0093]);c) if the connection quality parameter to the wireless communication network is less than the minimum value and at the same time said microprocessor unit determines that the land vehicle can no longer continue along the planned path, choose a new, different path with said microprocessor unit from said planned path, which the land vehicle can follow to reach a first environment in said map in which said connection quality parameter exceeds the minimum value (see at least [0096], [0098-0099], [0101], [0110], and [0127-0128]); d) if the land vehicle reaches said first environment following the new path in less time than a predetermined maximum time starting from the moment it was determined that the land vehicle could not follow the planned path, sending a request for help to a remote control center through said wireless communication network (see at least [0061], [0125], [0135], [0136], [Figures 4 and 8); if, on the other hand, the land vehicle does not reach said first environment in said maximum predetermined time, stopping the land vehicle when said maximum predetermined time has elapsed starting from the moment when it was determined that the land vehicle could not follow the planned path (see at least [0130] and [0133]).
However, Teague do not specifically disclose a memory containing an augmented map of territories that can be crossed by the land vehicle, in which said augmented map comprises a topographical map of' the territories accompanied by information on a connection quality parameter to said wireless communication network in correspondence with said territories.
Fasola teaches a memory containing an augmented map of territories that can be crossed by the land vehicle (see at least [0020] and [0054-0061]), in which said augmented map comprises a topographical map of' the territories accompanied by information on a connection quality parameter to said wireless communication network in correspondence with said territories (see at least [0020] and [0054-0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Teague, with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the teachings of Fasola, a memory containing an augmented map of territories that can be crossed by the land vehicle, in which said augmented map comprises a topographical map of' the territories accompanied by information on a connection quality parameter to said wireless communication network in correspondence with said territories. This would be done to provide a more
efficient method of controlling a self-driving land vehicle which significantly reduces mis-localization issues (see Fasola para 0002-0003).
With respect to claim 2, Teague discloses comprising the operations of: if the connection quality parameter of the land vehicle to the wireless communication network is less than the minimum value, carrying out the following operations at the remote control center: - determining a position of the land vehicle (see at least [0051], [0061], and [Figure 3]); - determining said new path that the control unit of the land vehicle would choose to reach said first environment of the new path in which said connection quality parameter is greater than the minimum value (see at least [0031] and [0036-004]);- if, from the moment in which the connection quality parameter of the land vehicle to the wireless communication network has become less than the minimum value, sufficient time has elapsed to allow the land vehicle to reach said first environment, checking whether the microprocessor control can be contacted via the wireless connection network or, in the opposite case, generating an alarm signal to send an operator to retrieve the land vehicle (see at least [0096], [0098-0099], [0101], [0110], and [0127-0128]).
With respect to claim 3, Teague discloses in which sensors selected from the set consisting of cameras (see at least [0050-0051]) and wireless communication network presence sensors are installed on board the land vehicle (see at least [0034], [0049-0050], and [0056]), said method further comprising the operation of detecting characteristics of an environment in which the land vehicle is located, carried out by means of said sensors installed on board the land vehicle (see at least [0069] and [0076]), said characteristics including at least a slope of said territories and the presence of obstacles which cannot be overcome by the land vehicle (see at least [0069] and [0076]).
However, Teague do not specifically disclose in which sensors selected from the set consisting of cameras.
Fasola teaches in which sensors selected from the set consisting of Lidar sensors (see at least [0039-0040] and [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Teague, with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the teachings of Fasola in which sensors selected from the set consisting of Lidar sensors. This would be done to provide a more
efficient method of controlling a self-driving land vehicle which significantly reduces mis-localization issues (see Fasola para 0002-0003).
With respect to claim 4, Teague discloses generating with said microprocessor unit the planned path that the land vehicle must follow from the place of departure to the place of arrival identified on the map (see at least [0061] and [0121]).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLA A KHALED whose telephone number is (571)272-9174. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:00 Am-5:00, every other Friday 8:00A-5:00AM.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313) 446-4821. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDALLA A KHALED/Examiner, Art Unit 3667