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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
No additional information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were submitted for consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Peoples Republic of China on 08/03/2022.
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 13, and 20, are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
No claims are cancelled.
No claims are added.
Claims 1, 13, and 20, are independent claims.
Claims 1-20 will be examined.
This Final Office action is in response to the “Amended Claims,” and “Applicant Arguments/Remarks,” dated 01/07/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Remarks/Arguments and amended claims, filed 01/07/2026 with respect to claims 1-20, have been fully considered and Applicant' s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Regarding Objection to Title, the applicant’s amendment to specification and response has been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the Objection to Title is withdrawn.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the applicant’s response and claim amendment to claims 1, 13, and 20, have been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for claims 1-20 is withdrawn.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101, the applicant’s response and claim amendment to claims 1, 13, and 20, has been fully considered and the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim analysis under step 2A, prong 1, recites a judicial exception wherein the limitations of “a first working state of a filter at a first moment, a second working state of the filter at a second moment, the second moment being after the first moment and the second working state of the filter including a course angle, a latitude of the vehicle, and a longitude of the vehicle at the second moment; predicting location information of the vehicle at the second moment based on the second working state.” The filtering limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of “a computer device, (i.e. a filter).” That is, other than reciting the “computing device,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “computing device,” language, the claim encompasses a user gathering odometer data at a first moment in time, and gathering odometer data at a second moment in time, determining locations at both the first and second moments in time, determining, with paper and pencil, a course angle, a latitude of the vehicle, and a longitude of the vehicle, and predicting location information of the vehicle at the second moment based on the second working state determined on the paper and pencil graphed vector, (a quantity having direction as well as magnitude) between the first location at a first moment in time, and the second location at a second moment in time. The mere nominal recitation of filtering does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103, the applicant’s response and claim amendment to claims 1, 13, and 20, have been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 for claims 1-20 is withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art reference(s) TADIC et al., US 20150246654, and previously disclosed prior art reference(s) DOUSSE, STREIT, CELIA, OGAWA, ZHOU, and PARK. The grounds for rejection in view of amended claims are provided below.
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, 3, 5, 13, 15, 17, and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOUSSE et al., US 20200088526, herein further known as Dousse, in view of TADIC et al., US 20150246654, herein further known as Tadic, further in view of STREIT et al., US 5902351, herein further known as Streit.
Regarding claim 1, Dousse discloses vehicle positioning method (¶ [0005], location(s) of vehicle), performed by a computer device (¶¶ [0005], [0025], [0046]), comprising: obtaining odometer data from an odometer of a vehicle during driving (¶¶ [0018-0019], [0059], odometer scaling factor, vehicle physical state variables); predicting , based on the odometer data and a first working state of a filter (¶¶ [0018-0019], [0059] vehicle physical state variables) at a first moment (¶¶ [0021], [0053], real-time sensor data), a second working state of the filter (¶¶ [0018-0019], [0059] vehicle physical state variables) at a second moment (¶¶ [0021], [0053], real-time sensor data), the second moment being after the first moment; predicting location information of the vehicle at the second moment based on the second working state (¶¶ [0016-0026], recursive Bayesian filter, Kalman filter, [0051], compare vehicle data with predetermined map data, (road coordinates), (i.e. working state), [0053-0054], predict the current location in real-time (i.e. first/second moment), recursive Bayesian filter); selecting a target road section that matches the location information from candidate road sections in an electronic map (¶¶ [0043], current location of a vehicle relative to a map, map-matching, [0049-0052], see also FIGS 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map), and determining matching information corresponding to the location information in the target road section (¶¶ [0043], map-matching, [0049-0052] wherein points 209, and 210, are interpreted as the matching information, and up-to-date map data for the road intersection (wherein map data for the road intersection can be interpreted as “mating point information”)); and correcting the location information based on the matching information (¶¶ [0043], correct errors in trajectory), to obtain positioning information of the vehicle at the second moment, the positioning information and working states of the filter being defined in the same coordinate system (¶¶ [0051], road coordinates, compare geographical coordinates, stored coordinates of a digital map).
However, Dousse does not explicitly state the second working state of the filter including a course angle, a latitude of the vehicle, and a longitude of the vehicle at the second moment; and matching point information.
Tadic teaches the second working state of the filter including a course angle, a latitude of the vehicle, and a longitude of the vehicle at the second moment (claim 28).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the second working state of the filter including a course angle, a latitude of the vehicle, and a longitude of the vehicle at the second moment as taught by Tadic.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Tadic for the reasons stated in Tadic paragraph [0030], more robust methods and system to improve private safety of the person (in the vehicle) and public safety (outside of the vehicle).
Furthermore, Streit teaches matching point information (column 4, lines 11-40, see also FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the matching point information as taught by Streit.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Streit for the reasons stated in Streit column 2, more robust method and system wherein accuracy of the vehicle tracking is greatly improved if an increased amount of vehicle state information, including redundant vehicle state information, is utilized by the vehicle tracking system.
Furthermore, Streit teaches vehicle positioning performed by a computer device (column 2, 50-60), comprising: obtaining odometer data from an odometer of a vehicle during driving (column 4, line 63 through column 5, line 4); predicting, based on the odometer data and a first working state of a filter at a first moment, a second working state of the filter at a second moment, the second moment being after the first moment; predicting location information of the vehicle at the second moment based on the second working state (column 5, lines 5-55); and working states of the filter being defined in the same coordinate system (column 1, lines 55-60).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the vehicle positioning performed by a computer device, comprising: obtaining odometer data from an odometer of a vehicle during driving; predicting, based on the odometer data and a first working state of a filter at a first moment, a second working state of the filter at a second moment, the second moment being after the first moment; predicting location information of the vehicle at the second moment based on the second working state; and working states of the filter being defined in the same coordinate system as taught by Streit.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Streit for the reasons stated in Streit column 2, more robust method and system wherein accuracy of the vehicle tracking is greatly improved if an increased amount of vehicle state information, including redundant vehicle state information, is utilized by the vehicle tracking system.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Dousse discloses further odometer data at different moments (¶¶ [0019], [0059] odometer scaling factor, [0021], [0053], real-time sensor data includes odometer); and wherein predicting the second working state of the filter at the second moment (¶¶ [0016-0026], recursive Bayesian filter, Kalman filter, [0051], compare vehicle data with predetermined map data, (road coordinates), (i.e. working state), [0053-0054], predict the current location in real-time (i.e. first/second moment), recursive Bayesian filter) comprises: determining an odometer increment based on the odometer data at different moments (¶¶ [0019], [0059] odometer scaling factor, [0021], [0053], real-time sensor data); and predicting the second working state of the filter at the second moment based on the odometer increment and the first working state of the filter at the first moment (¶¶ [0016-0026], recursive Bayesian filter, Kalman filter, [0051], compare vehicle data with predetermined map data, (road coordinates), (i.e. working state), [0053-0054], predict the current location in real-time (i.e. first/second moment), recursive Bayesian filter).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Dousse discloses further selecting the target road section that matches the location information from the candidate road sections in the electronic map (¶¶ [0043], current location of a vehicle relative to a map, map-matching, [0049-0052], see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map), and determining the matching information corresponding to the location information in the target road section (¶¶ [0049-0052], see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map) comprises: selecting, based on the electronic map being a first precision map (¶¶ [0049-0052], digital map, see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map), the target road section that matches the location information from the candidate road sections of the first precision map (¶¶ [0049-0052], initial location 209 of vehicle); determining projection point information of the location information in the target road section (¶¶ [0049-0052], common point 210 on the road network); and using the projection point information (¶¶ [0049-0052], common point 210 on the road network) as the matching information corresponding to the location information (¶¶ [0049-0052], map-matched location, up-to-date map data for the road intersection (wherein map data for the road intersection can be interpreted as “mating point information”) .
However Dousse does not explicitly state matching point information.
Streit teaches matching point information (column 4, lines 11-40, see also FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the matching point information as taught by Streit.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Streit for the reasons stated in Streit column 2, more robust method and system wherein accuracy of the vehicle tracking is greatly improved if an increased amount of vehicle state information, including redundant vehicle state information, is utilized by the vehicle tracking system.
Regarding claim 13, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 13 can clearly perform the methods of claim 1. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 15, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 3. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 15 can clearly perform the methods of claim 3. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 17, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 5. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 17 can clearly perform the methods of claim 5. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 20, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 1. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 20 can clearly perform the methods of claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Claims 2, and 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, in view of CELIA, US 20140129136, herein further known as Celia.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Dousse discloses initializing the filter based on the odometer data and the navigation positioning data; selecting a target location from the navigation positioning data (¶¶ [0016-0026], recursive Bayesian filter, Kalman filter, [0051], compare vehicle data with predetermined map data, (road coordinates), (i.e. working state), [0053-0054], predict the current location in real-time (i.e. first/second moment), recursive Bayesian filter) and determining an initial working state of the filter (¶¶ [0016-0026], recursive Bayesian filter, Kalman filter, [0051], compare vehicle data with predetermined map data, (road coordinates), (i.e. working state), [0053-0054], predict the current location in real-time (i.e. first/second moment), recursive Bayesian filter).
However, Dousse does not explicitly state obtaining historical odometer data and navigation positioning data of the vehicle during driving; as a starting positioning point during the initialization; based on course information and location information of the stai1ing positioning point.
Celia teaches obtaining historical odometer data and navigation positioning data of the vehicle during driving (¶¶ [0016], odometer, instantaneous position by starting from a position known at a previous time instant; as a starting positioning point during the initialization (¶¶ [0112-0113]); based on course information (¶¶ [0016], calculating a path… and location information of the starting positioning point (¶¶ [0112-0113]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the obtaining historical odometer data and navigation positioning data of the vehicle during driving; as a starting positioning point during the initialization; based on course information and location information of the stai1ing positioning point as taught by Celia.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Celia for the reasons stated in Celia paragraph [0002], more robust system and method for ensuring continuity of service of a personal navigation device which is used in the event of insufficient reception of GNSS satellite signals so the user is not forced to move around "blindly", i.e. with no route indication from the personal navigation device.
Regarding claim 14, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 2. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 14 can clearly perform the methods of claim 2. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2 above.
Claims 6, and 18, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, in view of OGAWA et al., US 20230332920, herein further known as Ogawa.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Dousse discloses first precision map (¶¶ [0049-0052], digital map, see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map).
However, Dousse does not explicitly state precision map comprises a self-maintained state, and the vehicle positioning method further comprises: using the location information as observation information; and correcting the self-maintained state based on the observation information, to obtain a corrected self-maintained state.
Ogawa teaches (¶¶ [0007-0013], [0033-0048], dynamic map, [0106], dynamic map can be maintained in a high state) precision map comprises a self-maintained state (¶¶ [0007-0013], [0033-0034], [0042], [0045-0048] update the dynamic map, and the vehicle positioning method further comprises: using the location information as observation information (¶¶ [0091], dynamic map input, and sensor data, position and state of vehicle over time ; and correcting the self-maintained state based on the observation information (¶¶ [0046], [0061], [0130] update dynamic map includes sensor data, see also FIG. 14), to obtain a corrected self-maintained state (¶ [0106], dynamic map can be maintained in a high state).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the precision map comprises a self-maintained state, and the vehicle positioning method further comprises: using the location information as observation information; and correcting the self-maintained state based on the observation information, to obtain a corrected self-maintained state as taught by Ogawa.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Ogawa for the reasons stated in Ogawa paragraph [0002], more robust system and method to collect information not only from sensor devices mounted on roadside devices but also from sensor devices mounted on vehicles in order to effectively use the information for driving assistance.
Regarding claim 18, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 6. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 18 can clearly perform the methods of claim 6. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 6 above.
Claims 7, and 19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, in view of ZHOU, US 20230032741, herein further known as Zhou.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Dousse discloses selecting the target road section that matches the location information from the candidate road sections in the electronic map (¶¶ [0043], current location of a vehicle relative to a map, map-matching, [0049-0052], see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map), and determining the matching point information corresponding to the location information in the target road section (¶¶ [0043], map-matching, [0049-0052] wherein points 209, and 210, are interpreted as the matching information, and up-to-date map data for the road intersection (wherein map data for the road intersection can be interpreted as “mating point information”))
However, Dousse does not explicitly state matching point information, and obtaining visual information carrying lane information based on the electronic map being a second precision map; fusing the visual information and the location information to obtain fused location information; selecting a target lane that matches the fused location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map; and determining the matching point information corresponding to the fused location information in the target lane.
Streit teaches matching point information (column 4, lines 11-40, see also FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the matching point information as taught by Streit.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Streit for the reasons stated in Streit column 2, more robust method and system wherein accuracy of the vehicle tracking is greatly improved if an increased amount of vehicle state information, including redundant vehicle state information, is utilized by the vehicle tracking system.
Furthermore, Zhou teaches obtaining visual information carrying lane information based on the electronic map being a second precision map (¶¶ [0004-0005], [0007], [0010-0011]); fusing the visual information and the location information to obtain fused location information (¶¶ [0071]); selecting a target lane that matches the fused location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map (¶¶ [0071], lane line added to the map); and determining the matching information corresponding to the fused location information in the target lane (¶¶ [0067-0071]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the obtaining visual information carrying lane information based on the electronic map being a second precision map; fusing the visual information and the location information to obtain fused location information; selecting a target lane that matches the fused location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map; and determining the matching point information corresponding to the fused location information in the target lane as taught by Zhou.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Zhou for the reasons stated in Zhou paragraph [0003], more robust system and methods to maintain stable tracking and updating in multiple frames and to continuously output more reliable information in complex scenarios.
Regarding claim 19, all limitations have been examined with respect to the method in claim 7. The apparatus taught/disclosed in claim 19 can clearly perform the methods of claim 7. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 7 above.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, in view of PARK, US 20210383693, herein further known as Park.
Regarding claim 9 the combination of Dousse, Tadic, and Streit, disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Dousse discloses selecting the target road section that matches the location information from the candidate road sections in the electronic map (¶¶ [0043], current location of a vehicle relative to a map, map-matching, [0049-0052], see also FIGS. 2A, 2B, (Standard Definition (SD) map), and determining the matching point information corresponding to the location information in the target road section (¶¶ [0043], map-matching, [0049-0052] wherein points 209, and 210, are interpreted as the matching information, and up-to-date map data for the road intersection (wherein map data for the road intersection can be interpreted as “mating point information”))
However, Dousse does not explicitly state matching point information and selecting, based on the electronic map being a second precision map, a target lane that matches the location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map; and determining the matching point information corresponding to the location information in the target lane.
Streit teaches matching point information (column 4, lines 11-40, see also FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the matching point information as taught by Streit.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Streit for the reasons stated in Streit column 2, more robust method and system wherein accuracy of the vehicle tracking is greatly improved if an increased amount of vehicle state information, including redundant vehicle state information, is utilized by the vehicle tracking system.
Furthermore, Park teaches selecting, based on the electronic map being a second precision map, a target lane that matches the location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map; and determining the matching point information corresponding to the location information in the target lane (¶¶ [0048], [0051-0054], [0097-0099], [0115], [0123]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Dousse the selecting, based on the electronic map being a second precision map, a target lane that matches the location information from candidate lanes of the second precision map; and determining the matching point information corresponding to the location information in the target lane as taught by Park.
One would be motivated to modify Dousse in view of Park for the reasons stated in Park, more robust system and method that may efficiently change lanes through active control on the driving assist system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 10-12, and 16, 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The claim rejections under 35 USC § 101, which are detailed above, must be overcome before a notice of allowance can be considered.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM EST.
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 Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights