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
Regarding the rejection under 101, the examiner agrees with applicant's arguments and further understands the new claim limitation, "start executing the lane change control, when the input of approval for the reproposal is received", constitutes a non-conditional effecting of a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c) - and is therefore indicative of integration of any abstract idea into a practical application.
Applicant’s amendments and arguments with respect to the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 112(b) rejection is therefore withdrawn. However, the newly amended claim language introduces an additional issue under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Accordingly, a new ground of rejection under 112(b) is applied to the claims as amended.
Applicant’s amendments and arguments with respect to the previous claims 1 and 5-7 filed on 10/21/2025 with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been fully considered and are unpersuasive specifically for “control a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied”.
With respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections of claims 1 and 5-7 Applicant argues the cited art of record, Zhang (US 2018/0293894 A1), fails to explicitly disclose the recited features of the amended claims 1 and 5-7 (see response pages 8-10), specifically “control a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied".
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As Zhang teaches “control a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied”, (See at least ¶ 40 and 83-86) “The notification device 220 may include, for example, a speaker (not shown) and a display device (not shown). The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the subject vehicle X1 is unable to perform the lane change. The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the lane change controller 100 asks whether to attempt the lane change again in a case where the subject vehicle X1 does not perform the lane change and is positioned to a predetermined position” and “the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device. Incidentally, various methods such as message, vibration, audio, signal, can be used for asking whether to attempt the lane change again” regarding that the system controls a notification device and asks the driver when the lane change cannot be performed due to insufficient space whether to attempt the lane change again (i.e., when the reproposal condition is satisfied).
With respect to the newly amended subject matter and applicant’s arguments, the Examiner relies upon newly cited references Yasuhisa et al (JPWO2020065892A1), (hereinafter Yasuhisa) and Oniwa (US 2023/0174070 A1).
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claimed wherein the processor determines that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again. It is not clear what it means for the “start condition” to be “predicted to be satisfied” the claims fails to recite what is being predicted, what data is used for prediction? Also, the phrase “before the start condition is satisfied again” introduces a comparison that is unclear and inconsistent as when the start condition was first satisfied? And whether the start condition must have already been satisfied once then whan constitutes being “satisfied again” and how the system distinguish between first satisifaction and subsequent satisfaction. Appropriate correction is required. Examiner interpreted this claim limitation as the vehicle system is predicting whether it’s safe to perform a lane change or not after the driver indicated a lane change intention.
Same rejection applies to claims 5-6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated in view of Zhang (US 2018/0293894 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang discloses a vehicle controller comprising: a processor configured to: (see Zhang paras “0009-0010” “a lane change system for a subject vehicle including a peripheral monitor, an instruction portion, a direction indicator, a vehicle guide system, and a lane change controller is provide”),
determine whether a start condition for proposing a lane change control for a host vehicle is satisfied, after receiving an input from a driver of the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “The lane change controller 100 executes a multi-step lane change process illustrated in FIG. 3A to FIG. 6. The turn signal switch 210 outputs the lane change initiation signal at a time of a lane change of the subject vehicle X1 upon receiving the lane change instruction” and “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210”),
determine whether the start condition for starting the lane change control for the host vehicle to change lanes is satisfied, after the proposal of the lane change control is not accepted or after execution of the lane change control is interrupted after acceptance of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0084-0086” “At S700, the notification portion 170 controls the notification device 220 to inform the driver that the lane change portion 160 is prevented from leading the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20. This notification may be performed by sound from the speaker, a message displayed on the display device, or the like. With this, the driver can recognize that the lane change is not performed” and “At S900, the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device”),
control a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the start condition is satisfied (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0083-0086” “The notification device 220 may include, for example, a speaker (not shown) and a display device (not shown). The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the subject vehicle X1 is unable to perform the lane change. The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the lane change controller 100 asks whether to attempt the lane change again in a case where the subject vehicle X1 does not perform the lane change and is positioned to a predetermined position”),
receive, from the driver of the host vehicle, an input of approval for the reproposal via an operating device provided for the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S700” and “S900” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver” and “the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device. Incidentally, various methods such as message, vibration, audio, signal, can be used for asking whether to attempt the lane change again”),
and start executing the lane change control when the input of approval for the reproposal is received (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S500”, “S700” and “S900” “At S500, upon determination that the sufficient space exists between the adjacent vehicles Y1, Y2, the lane change portion 160 performs a lane change process. The lane change process will be explained with reference to the flowchart illustrated in FIG. 6” and “The lane change portion 160 controls the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 by the vehicle guide system. The lane change portion 160 controls the vehicle guide system to lead the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 upon detecting that the sufficient space is available”).
the operation of approval for the reproposal is different than an operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210” and via paras “0083-0088” steps “S500-S900”).
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 (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.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Zhang (US 2018/0293894 A1) in further view of Yasuhisa et al (JPWO2020065892A1), (hereinafter Yasuhisa).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses a vehicle controller comprising: a processor configured to: (see Zhang paras “0009-0010” “a lane change system for a subject vehicle including a peripheral monitor, an instruction portion, a direction indicator, a vehicle guide system, and a lane change controller is provide”),
determine whether a start condition for proposing a lane change control for a host vehicle is satisfied, after receiving an input from a driver of the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “The lane change controller 100 executes a multi-step lane change process illustrated in FIG. 3A to FIG. 6. The turn signal switch 210 outputs the lane change initiation signal at a time of a lane change of the subject vehicle X1 upon receiving the lane change instruction” and “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210”),
determine whether a reproposal condition for reproposing the lane change control for a host vehicle to change lanes is satisfied, when the proposal for the lane change control is not accepted or when execution of the lane change control is interrupted after acceptance of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0084-0086” “At S700, the notification portion 170 controls the notification device 220 to inform the driver that the lane change portion 160 is prevented from leading the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20. This notification may be performed by sound from the speaker, a message displayed on the display device, or the like. With this, the driver can recognize that the lane change is not performed” and “At S900, the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device”),
control a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0083-0086” “The notification device 220 may include, for example, a speaker (not shown) and a display device (not shown). The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the subject vehicle X1 is unable to perform the lane change. The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the lane change controller 100 asks whether to attempt the lane change again in a case where the subject vehicle X1 does not perform the lane change and is positioned to a predetermined position”),
receive, from the driver of the host vehicle, an input of approval for the reproposal via an operating device provided for the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S700” and “S900” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver” and “the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device. Incidentally, various methods such as message, vibration, audio, signal, can be used for asking whether to attempt the lane change again”),
and start executing the lane change control, when the input of approval for the reproposal is received (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S500”, “S700” and “S900” “At S500, upon determination that the sufficient space exists between the adjacent vehicles Y1, Y2, the lane change portion 160 performs a lane change process. The lane change process will be explained with reference to the flowchart illustrated in FIG. 6” and “The lane change portion 160 controls the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 by the vehicle guide system. The lane change portion 160 controls the vehicle guide system to lead the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 upon detecting that the sufficient space is available”).
But Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the processor determines that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again.
However, Yasuhisa teaches wherein the processor determines that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again (see Yasuhisa paras “0067-0068”, “0072-0077” and “0088-0089” “the control device 19 predicts the required time T1 for changing lanes by the lane change control function”, “the control device 19 predicts the target range OS after the required time T1 predicted in step S6 by the lane change control function. Specifically, the lane change control function predicts the traveling position of the other vehicle V1 after the required time T1”, “This required range RR is a range of a size required when the own vehicle V0 changes lanes... Judging that there is a space”, “when the required range RR is included in the target range OS of the adjacent lane L3 after the required time T1… It is determined that there is a space” and “This determination of the predetermined time is performed in order to re-present the first travel control change information Td1 when there is no response from the driver D within the predetermined time” regarding the system predicts when lane change can be executed and whether sufficient space will exist in the future and then re-present the lane change information to the driver (i.e., reproposing)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to incorporate the prediction-based determination and timing technique to determine whether the lane change can be performed or not according to a sufficient space” as taught by Yasuhisa (paras. [0068-0069] – [0075-0088]) in order to improve lane change timing accuracy and enhancing driver confirmation and system reliability.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses wherein the processor determines that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied after a predetermined action performed by the driver (see Zhang paras “0096-0098” “when the driver instructs a lane change to a vehicle, the vehicle first approaches a lane boundary line while providing an indication of lane change. The subject vehicle X1 indicates the lane change intention through blinking the direction indicator” and “the multi-step lane change system may include the notification portion that provides information for the driver, the lane boundary approach portion informs the driver that the lane change is prevented when the vehicle does not perform the lane change. Accordingly, it may be possible for the driver to recognize a situation in which the lane change is not performed. It may be possible for the driver to reconsider whether the lane change is attempted again so as to input the instruction of the lane change”).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang discloses wherein the operation of approval for the reproposal is different than an operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210” and via paras “0083-0088” steps “S500-S900”).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang discloses a method for vehicle control, comprising: (see Zhang paras “0009-0010” “a lane change system for a subject vehicle including a peripheral monitor, an instruction portion, a direction indicator, a vehicle guide system, and a lane change controller is provide”),
determining whether a start condition for proposing a lane change control for a host vehicle is satisfied, after receiving an input from a driver of the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “The lane change controller 100 executes a multi-step lane change process illustrated in FIG. 3A to FIG. 6. The turn signal switch 210 outputs the lane change initiation signal at a time of a lane change of the subject vehicle X1 upon receiving the lane change instruction” and “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210”),
determining whether a reproposal condition for reproposing the lane change control for the host vehicle to change lanes is satisfied, when the proposal of the lane change control is not accepted or when execution of the lane change control is interrupted after acceptance of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0084-0086” “At S700, the notification portion 170 controls the notification device 220 to inform the driver that the lane change portion 160 is prevented from leading the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20. This notification may be performed by sound from the speaker, a message displayed on the display device, or the like. With this, the driver can recognize that the lane change is not performed” and “At S900, the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device”),
controlling a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0083-0086” “The notification device 220 may include, for example, a speaker (not shown) and a display device (not shown). The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the subject vehicle X1 is unable to perform the lane change. The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the lane change controller 100 asks whether to attempt the lane change again in a case where the subject vehicle X1 does not perform the lane change and is positioned to a predetermined position”),
receiving, from the driver of the host vehicle, an input of approval for the reproposal via an operating device provided for the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S700” and “S900” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver” and “the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device. Incidentally, various methods such as message, vibration, audio, signal, can be used for asking whether to attempt the lane change again”),
and start executing the lane change control, when the input of approval for the reproposal is received (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S500”, “S700” and “S900” “At S500, upon determination that the sufficient space exists between the adjacent vehicles Y1, Y2, the lane change portion 160 performs a lane change process. The lane change process will be explained with reference to the flowchart illustrated in FIG. 6” and “The lane change portion 160 controls the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 by the vehicle guide system. The lane change portion 160 controls the vehicle guide system to lead the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 upon detecting that the sufficient space is available”).
But Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein determination whether the reproposal condition is satisfied comprises determining that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again.
However, Yasuhisa teaches wherein determination whether the reproposal condition is satisfied comprises determining that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again (see Yasuhisa paras “0067-0068”, “0072-0077” and “0088-0089” “the control device 19 predicts the required time T1 for changing lanes by the lane change control function”, “the control device 19 predicts the target range OS after the required time T1 predicted in step S6 by the lane change control function. Specifically, the lane change control function predicts the traveling position of the other vehicle V1 after the required time T1”, “This required range RR is a range of a size required when the own vehicle V0 changes lanes... Judging that there is a space”, “when the required range RR is included in the target range OS of the adjacent lane L3 after the required time T1… It is determined that there is a space” and “This determination of the predetermined time is performed in order to re-present the first travel control change information Td1 when there is no response from the driver D within the predetermined time” regarding the system predicts when lane change can be executed and whether sufficient space will exist in the future and then re-present the lane change information to the driver (i.e., reproposing)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to incorporate the prediction-based determination and timing technique to determine whether the lane change can be performed or not according to a sufficient space” as taught by Yasuhisa (paras. [0068-0069] – [0075-0088]) in order to improve lane change timing accuracy and enhancing driver confirmation and system reliability.
Regarding claim 6, Zhang discloses a non-transitory recording medium that stores a computer program for vehicle control, the computer program causing a processor mounted on a host vehicle to execute a process comprising: (see Zhang paras “0009-0010” and “0035” “a lane change system for a subject vehicle including a peripheral monitor, an instruction portion, a direction indicator, a vehicle guide system, and a lane change controller is provide”),
determining whether a start condition for proposing a lane change control for a host vehicle is satisfied, after receiving an input from a driver of the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver”, “The lane change controller 100 executes a multi-step lane change process illustrated in FIG. 3A to FIG. 6. The turn signal switch 210 outputs the lane change initiation signal at a time of a lane change of the subject vehicle X1 upon receiving the lane change instruction” and “determines, based on the lane change initiation signal received from the turn signal switch 210”),
determining whether a reproposal condition for reproposing the lane change control for the host vehicle to change lanes is satisfied, when the proposal of the lane change control is not accepted or when execution of the lane change control is interrupted after acceptance of the lane change control (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0084-0086” “At S700, the notification portion 170 controls the notification device 220 to inform the driver that the lane change portion 160 is prevented from leading the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20. This notification may be performed by sound from the speaker, a message displayed on the display device, or the like. With this, the driver can recognize that the lane change is not performed” and “At S900, the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device”),
controlling a notification device to repropose execution of the lane change control to the driver of the host vehicle, when the reproposal condition is satisfied (see Zhang paras “0040” and “0083-0086” “The notification device 220 may include, for example, a speaker (not shown) and a display device (not shown). The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the subject vehicle X1 is unable to perform the lane change. The notification device 220 provides notification to the driver when the lane change controller 100 asks whether to attempt the lane change again in a case where the subject vehicle X1 does not perform the lane change and is positioned to a predetermined position”),
receiving, from the driver of the host vehicle, an input of approval for the reproposal via an operating device provided for the host vehicle (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S700” and “S900” “The driver operates the turn signal switch 210 to input a lane change instruction when the driver intends to change a drive lane where the subject vehicle X1 is driving to another lane. The turn signal switch 210 outputs to the lane change controller 100, a lane change initiation signal upon receiving the lane change instruction from the driver” and “the notification portion 170 asks the driver whether to attempt the lane change of the subject vehicle X1 again through a message displayed on the display device. Incidentally, various methods such as message, vibration, audio, signal, can be used for asking whether to attempt the lane change again”),
and start executing the lane change control, when the input of approval for the reproposal is received (see Zhang paras “0038-0040” and “0084-0088” as in steps “S500”, “S700” and “S900” “At S500, upon determination that the sufficient space exists between the adjacent vehicles Y1, Y2, the lane change portion 160 performs a lane change process. The lane change process will be explained with reference to the flowchart illustrated in FIG. 6” and “The lane change portion 160 controls the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 by the vehicle guide system. The lane change portion 160 controls the vehicle guide system to lead the subject vehicle X1 to move from the current drive lane 10 to the adjacent lane 20 upon detecting that the sufficient space is available”).
But Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein determination whether the reproposal condition is satisfied comprises determining that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again.
However, Yasuhisa teaches wherein determination whether the reproposal condition is satisfied comprises determining that the reproposal condition is satisfied, when the start condition is predicted to be satisfied before the start condition is satisfied again (see Yasuhisa paras “0067-0068”, “0072-0077” and “0088-0089” “the control device 19 predicts the required time T1 for changing lanes by the lane change control function”, “the control device 19 predicts the target range OS after the required time T1 predicted in step S6 by the lane change control function. Specifically, the lane change control function predicts the traveling position of the other vehicle V1 after the required time T1”, “This required range RR is a range of a size required when the own vehicle V0 changes lanes... Judging that there is a space”, “when the required range RR is included in the target range OS of the adjacent lane L3 after the required time T1… It is determined that there is a space” and “This determination of the predetermined time is performed in order to re-present the first travel control change information Td1 when there is no response from the driver D within the predetermined time” regarding the system predicts when lane change can be executed and whether sufficient space will exist in the future and then re-present the lane change information to the driver (i.e., reproposing)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to incorporate the prediction-based determination and timing technique to determine whether the lane change can be performed or not according to a sufficient space” as taught by Yasuhisa (paras. [0068-0069] – [0075-0088]) in order to improve lane change timing accuracy and enhancing driver confirmation and system reliability.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Zhang (US 2018/0293894 A1) in further view of Yasuhisa et al (JPWO2020065892A1), (hereinafter Yasuhisa) as in claim 1 above, in further view of Kume et al (US 2024/0371272 A1) (Hereinafter Kume).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the processor modifies the number of times or a period of notification of the reproposal, depending on a reason for proposing the lane change control of which execution is interrupted.
However, Kume teaches wherein the processor modifies the number of times or a period of notification of the reproposal, depending on a reason for proposing the lane change control of which execution is interrupted (see Kume para “0113” “In a manner similar to the notification processing unit 141, in the case where the second waiting situation is identified by the situation identifying unit 121a, the notification processing unit 141a makes the waiting notification. However, it is preferable not to make the waiting cause notification. At the time of a re-challenge of performing the automatic lane change again after the automatic lane change of the host vehicle is cancelled, preferably, the notification processing unit 141a also makes the display device 171 which is not made the LC-related display before the re-challenge perform the LC-related display. The expression “after the automatic lane change of the host vehicle is cancelled” can be also changed as “after the automatic lane change cannot be completed”.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to identify a situation of the vehicle and make a notification to the inside of a compartment of the vehicle after the lane change is canceled” as taught by Kume (para. [0113]) in order to reduce a feeling of strangeness given to the driver even when a lane change has to be waited during an automatic lane change in autonomous driving without monitoring responsibility.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Zhang (US 2018/0293894 A1) in further view of Yasuhisa et al (JPWO2020065892A1), (hereinafter Yasuhisa) in further view of Oniwa (US 2023/0174070 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Zhang fails to explicitly teach the input of approval for the reproposal is received by pushing down a predetermined button provided on the turn signal lever or a steering wheel, or voicing approval.
However, Yasuhisa teaches the input of approval for the reproposal is received by pushing down a predetermined button provided on the turn signal lever or a steering wheel, or voicing approval (see Yasuhisa paras “0015” and “0088-0093” “The input device 16 is, for example, a device such as a dial switch capable of inputting manually by a driver, a touch panel arranged on a display screen, or a microphone capable of inputting by voice of a driver. In the present embodiment, the driver can operate the input device 16 to input the response information to the presentation information presented by the presentation device 15. For example, in the present embodiment, a turn signal or a switch of another in-vehicle device 14 can be used as an input device 16, and the driver responds to an inquiry as to whether or not the control device 19 automatically changes the travel control” and “determines whether or not a predetermined time has elapsed after the presentation of the first travel control change information Td1 by the lane change information presenting function. This determination of the predetermined time is performed in order to re-present the first travel control change information Td1 when there is no response from the driver D within the predetermined time after the first travel control change information Td1 is presented. For this predetermined time, for example, a preset time may be used, or the predetermined time may be set according to the distance or time to the lane change point. If the predetermined time has not elapsed in step S120, the process returns to step S112 and the first travel control change information Td1 is re-presented”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to determine whether the driver accepts to perform a lane change after representing again via voice or turning the lever up or down” as taught by Yasuhisa (paras [0088-0093]) in order to improve lane change timing accuracy and enhancing driver confirmation and system reliability.
Zhang teaches wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever (see at least Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095”), but modified Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever by a predetermined amount for a predetermined period,
However, Oniwa teaches wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever by a predetermined amount for a predetermined period (see Oniwa paras “0098-0101” and “0128-0129” “when the half-lock operation of the turn signal lever 81 is operated (performed) for the first predetermined time (for example, 1.0 [sec]) or more, the travel control unit 170 detects that there is an intention to change the lane. In addition, the travel control unit 170 performs the control to start to turn on the turn signal 83 (notification of the turn signal) when the intention of the driver to change the lane is detected, and to start the lateral movement for the automatic lane change after the second predetermined time (for example, 3.0 [sec]) elapses from the start of turning-on of the turn signal 83”),
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of modified Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to turn the signal up or down for a predetermined time to indicate lane change intention” as taught by Oniwa (paras. [0098-0101]) in order to improve operational accuracy and preventing unintended lane change intention.
Regarding claim 9, Zhang fails to explicitly teach the input of approval for the reproposal is received by pushing down a predetermined button provided on the turn signal lever or a steering wheel, or voicing approval.
However, Yasuhisa teaches the input of approval for the reproposal is received by pushing down a predetermined button provided on the turn signal lever or a steering wheel, or voicing approval (see Yasuhisa paras “0015” and “0088-0093” “The input device 16 is, for example, a device such as a dial switch capable of inputting manually by a driver, a touch panel arranged on a display screen, or a microphone capable of inputting by voice of a driver. In the present embodiment, the driver can operate the input device 16 to input the response information to the presentation information presented by the presentation device 15. For example, in the present embodiment, a turn signal or a switch of another in-vehicle device 14 can be used as an input device 16, and the driver responds to an inquiry as to whether or not the control device 19 automatically changes the travel control” and “determines whether or not a predetermined time has elapsed after the presentation of the first travel control change information Td1 by the lane change information presenting function. This determination of the predetermined time is performed in order to re-present the first travel control change information Td1 when there is no response from the driver D within the predetermined time after the first travel control change information Td1 is presented. For this predetermined time, for example, a preset time may be used, or the predetermined time may be set according to the distance or time to the lane change point. If the predetermined time has not elapsed in step S120, the process returns to step S112 and the first travel control change information Td1 is re-presented”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to determine whether the driver accepts to perform a lane change after representing again via voice or turning the lever up or down” as taught by Yasuhisa (paras [0088-0093]) in order to improve lane change timing accuracy and enhancing driver confirmation and system reliability.
Zhang teaches wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever (see at least Zhang paras “0038-0039” and “0095”), but modified Zhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever by a predetermined amount for a predetermined period,
However, Oniwa teaches wherein the operation for the driver to give an instruction of the lane change control is an operation for pushing up or down a turn signal lever by a predetermined amount for a predetermined period (see Oniwa paras “0098-0101” and “0128-0129” “when the half-lock operation of the turn signal lever 81 is operated (performed) for the first predetermined time (for example, 1.0 [sec]) or more, the travel control unit 170 detects that there is an intention to change the lane. In addition, the travel control unit 170 performs the control to start to turn on the turn signal 83 (notification of the turn signal) when the intention of the driver to change the lane is detected, and to start the lateral movement for the automatic lane change after the second predetermined time (for example, 3.0 [sec]) elapses from the start of turning-on of the turn signal 83”),
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of modified Zhang for lane change system and lane change controller “to turn the signal up or down for a predetermined time to indicate lane change intention” as taught by Oniwa (paras. [0098-0101]) in order to improve operational accuracy and preventing unintended lane change intention.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSSAM M ABDELLATIF whose telephone number is (571)272-5869. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 am-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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/HOSSAM M ABD EL LATIF/Examiner, Art Unit 3664