CTNF 18/609,296 CTNF 88165 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 01/08/2026 and 04/27/2026 have been considered by the examiner. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), of which papers have been placed in the file wrapper. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 16-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The limitations of “determine a set of land divider matches within a road segment based in part on an initial transform” and “the initial transform determined using an adjacent segment having at least a threshold match correspondence”, cover performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a “processor” in claim 16 nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “processor” language, “determining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually detecting lane divider matches by overlaying two trajectories and determining a transformation of an adjacent segment by the amount of alignment. Therefore, these claims limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, as nowhere in the claim does it state what application is being performed. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element – using a processor to perform the determining the set of lane dividers and determining the initial transform. The processor in each step is recited at a high-level of generality ( i.e. , as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of ranking information based on a determined amount of use) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to determine lane dividers and determine an initial transform, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 19 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. Regarding claim 19 , the system of claim 16, wherein the set of lane divider matches for the road segment is identified based at least on a second transform for the road segment falling within at least one of a translation distance threshold or a rotation threshold of the initial transform from the adjacent road segment. (The disclosed prior art of record fails to disclose the limitations of this claim. Additionally, these steps cannot be practically performed in the mind so they would not invoke a 35 USC 101 abstract idea rejection.) 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-15 are allowed. 13-03 AIA The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest found prior art references for each independent claim are disclosed below. These prior art references disclose some but not all of the limitations of the claims. Adams et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0207943 A1) Regarding claim 1 , Adams discloses, a computer-implemented method, comprising: comparing, using an initial transform and for a road segment, a first set of lane dividers within a set of first track data to a second set of lane dividers within a set of second track data; (See Adams ¶15, “Additional, non-limiting examples of map elements may include a bike lane element, a parking element, an intersection element, a lane divider element, a stop sign element, a yield sign element, a yield line element, and the like.” Further see Adams ¶23, “At operation 102 , the process can include receiving map data and map element(s) associated with a first trajectory.” Further see Adams ¶26 At operation 114 , the process can include receiving a second trajectory. Further see Adams ¶27 At operation 122 , the process can include determining an alignment between the first trajectory and the second trajectory to determine a transformation between the first trajectory and an updated first trajectory.”) determining an updated transform using at least the initial transform, the first set of lane dividers, and the second set of lane dividers; (See Adams ¶28, “When an optimal alignment between the two data sets is reached, the transformation associated with the LIDAR alignment can be applied to the corresponding trajectories to determine the updated first trajectory 128 .”) selecting the updated transform as a seed transform based at least on a determination that a difference in one or more parameters between the initial transform and the updated transform is below one or more thresholds; using the updated transform to verify lane divider matches between the set of first track data and the set of second track data; and providing the updated transform to aid in determining a third set of lane dividers in an adjacent road segment. (The disclosed prior art of record fails to disclose these limitations of the claim.) Eldar et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0064057 A1) Regarding claim 10 , Eldar discloses, at least one processor comprising: one or more logic units to: (See Eldar ¶116, “Processing unit 110 may comprise various types of devices. For example, processing unit 110 may include various devices, such as a controller, an image preprocessor, a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), support circuits, digital signal processors, integrated circuits, memory, or any other types of devices for image processing and analysis.”) generate a first transform based at least on a segment of road data (See Eldar ¶313, “FIG. 15 illustrates an example by which additional detail may be generated for a sparse map within a segment of a map skeleton (e.g., segment A to B within skeleton 1420) … Server 1230 may longitudinally align the drives to align the matched landmarks. For example, server 1230 may select one drive (e.g., drive 1520) as a reference drive and then shift and/or elastically stretch the other drive(s) (e.g., drive 1510) for alignment.”) with a threshold level of feature correspondence; (See Eldar ¶314. Accordingly, server 1230 may accept potential landmarks when a ratio of images in which the landmark does appear to images in which the landmark does not appear exceeds a threshold.”) identify a first set of landmark matches and a first set of lane divider matches for an adjacent segment; (See Eldar ¶313, “Server 1230 may identify landmarks for the sparse map by identifying unique matches between landmarks 1501 , 1503 , and 1505 of drive 1510 and landmarks 1507 and 1509 of drive 1520 .” Further see Eldar ¶355, “Vehicle 200 may be configured to detect lane marks in a given road segment. The road segment may include any markings on a road for guiding vehicle traffic on a roadway.”) determine a second transform for the adjacent segment of road data using the first transform, the first set of landmark matches, and the first set of land divider matches; and identify a second set of lane divider matches within the adjacent segment of road data based at least on the second transform. (The disclosed prior art of record fails to disclose these limitations of the claim.) Regarding claims 2-9 and 11-15, these claims are allowed since they depend from allowed claims . Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Listed below are the prior arts made of record and not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Bijnen et al. (US Pub. No. 2009/0195768 A1) An alignment mark comprising a periodic structure formed by mark lines is described. In an embodiment, the alignment mark is formed in a scribe lane of a substrate, the scribe lane extending in a scribe lane direction. The alignment mark includes: a first area including a first periodic structure formed by first mark lines extending in a first direction, the first direction being at a first angle .alpha. with respect to the scribe lane direction: 0.degree.<.alpha.<90.degree. and a second area comprising second periodic structure formed by second mark lines extending in a second direction, the second direction being at a second angle .beta. with respect to the scribe lane direction: -90.degree..ltoreq..beta.<0.degree. Kagimoto et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0005673 A1) An object of the present invention is to provide a dividing line recognition device capable of generating dividing line information including a dividing line of a portion that cannot be detected by a sensor in a form in which reliability is added to each portion of the dividing line. A dividing line recognition device ( 100 ) of the present invention includes: a dividing line information acquisition unit ( 101 ) configured to acquire dividing line information around an own vehicle; a target information acquisition unit ( 103 ) configured to acquire target information around the own vehicle; an other vehicle state estimation unit ( 104 ) configured to estimate a state of another vehicle on the basis of the target information; Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID PERLMAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1417. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday; 10:00am -6:30pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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. /DAVID PERLMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 2 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 3 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 4 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 5 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 6 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 7 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 8 Art Unit: 2673 Application/Control Number: 18/609,296 Page 9 Art Unit: 2673
Prosecution Insights