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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims as outlined below rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims as outlined below of U.S. Patent No. 11971487. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the current application and the 11971487 patent apply specific operating parameters on the detection unit based on specific parameters of a local landmark based on either the size or reflectance of features of the landmark.
Claims of current application
Claims of 11971487
1
3
2
2
3
4
4
5
5
9
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitano (20180254607) in view of Shashua (20170010618).
Referring to claim 1, Kitano a control device and corresponding computer-implemented method (see figure 1) comprising:
a memory configured to store configuration information indicative of a parameter to be set to a detection unit (see paragraph 35 note the storage unit or server) for each
a control unit, including a microprocessor (see figure 1 note the signal processor Ref 4), configured to:
obtain position information indicative of a position of a body (see figure 8 note Ref S103 also see paragraph 63);
obtain feature data regarding features situated around the body, the feature data including position information and at least one (see figure 8 Ref S104 note the determined angle range for the landmarks in the detected area)
control the detection unit based on the configuration information and the feature data (see starting the light pulse scanning at the predicted angle ranges in step 105),
wherein the detection unit emits light while changing an emitting direction of the light (see the scanning of the feature as shown in figure 6 note the specific scan lines as well as the landmark Ref 70), and
wherein, for plural features to be detected by the detection unit, based on the position information associated with the plural features and the position information associated with the body, the control unit is configured to:
specify emitting directions for respective locations of the plural features (see figure 6 note the edges of the feature that are expected to be 0.4 m apart as shown in the exploded view of the landmark Ref 70); and
set the configuration information to be applied to the detection unit for each of the specified emitting directions (see the configuration of the detection system that is to be set as shown under paragraph 53 specifically see paragraph 56 note the change of the pulse rate of the detection system within the predicted angular range of the landmark and corresponding features).
While the system as shown by Kitano shows knowing the edges of the landmark and how far the edges are apart see paragraph 57 Kitano fails to specifically indicate that the landmark includes reflectance or size of the features.
Menashe shows a similar device that includes a plurality of landmarks that are stored in a database and passed to a body that includes feature data regarding features situated around the body, the feature data including position information and at least one of reflectance and size of each of the features (see paragraph 12 note the parameters of a landmark include the size as well as the position).
Referring to claim 2, Kitano shows wherein the body is a vehicle (see figure 6 Ref 100).
Referring to claim 3, Kitano shows the control unit is configured to obtain the configuration information corresponding to the features from a database of the feature information (see paragraph 35).
Referring to claim 4, Kitano shows the database is positioned at the body, or at a server (see paragraph 35 note the storage is either onboard the vehicle or on a server).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUKE D RATCLIFFE whose telephone number is (571)272-3110. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/LUKE D RATCLIFFE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
