Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed November 3, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amended claims which included the new limitation of “a vehicle controller output, the vehicle controller output configured to operate a steering system in response to determining that the present likelihood exceeds the predetermined trigger threshold subsequent to executing the automated mirror evasion maneuver” which would have been considered as follows:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-4, 6-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over POHL (US 2019/0047473 A1) in view of Choi (US 2022/016931 A1).
Regarding claim 1, POHL invention teaches mirror collision avoidance system for a vehicle (100) [para. 0039 teaches a collision avoidance system to protect one or more assemblies attached to a vehicle], the system comprising: one or more mirror collision anticipation sensors (MCASs) [sensor (130)] to generate one or more sensor signals based on detecting a proximate environment of one or more vehicle side-view mirrors [side mirror assembly (120)] {para. 0046 teaches the vehicle (100) may further include one or more sensors (130) configured to receive obstacle information associated with a location of one or more obstacles (131) in a vicinity of the vehicle (100)}; a motor controller (140) to electromechanically reposition the one or more vehicle side-view mirrors (120) relative to a vehicle main body [para. 0060 teaches the electric motor (202) may be configured to drive the movement (121) of the at least part (120m) of the assembly (120) from the first position (123a) to the second position (123b) and, e.g., optionally, from the second position (123b) back into the first position (123a). The one or more processors (140) of the vehicle (100) may be configured to trigger the movement (121) of at least the part (120m) of the assembly (120) by instructing a control of the electric motor (202) or by controlling the electric motor (202)]; a response processor (140) comprising: a sensor input to electrically couple with the one or more MCASs (130) to receive the one or more sensor signals [para. 0040 teaches the collision avoidance system may further include a computing system. The computing system may include one or more processors, one or more memories, etc. The computing system may be communicatively coupled to the one or more sensors of the vehicle to obtain and analyze sensor data generated by the one or more sensors]; a mirror collision predictor to compute a present likelihood of an imminent collision event based on monitoring the one or more sensor signals, and to generate a trigger signal responsive to detecting that the present likelihood exceeds a predetermined trigger threshold [para. 0042 teaches the vehicle may further include one or more processors configured to predict a collision threat to the assembly based on the obstacle information, and to trigger the movement of at least the part of the assembly from the first position into the second position in the case that the collision threat is predicted]; and a motor control output to electrically couple with the motor controller to trigger the motor controller to execute an automated mirror evasion maneuver responsive to the trigger signal [see at least Figures 7-9; and para. 0077; Note that the electronically connection between controllers would have been well-known in this art].
POHL invention fails to specifically teach a vehicle controller output configured to operate a steering system in response to determining the present likelihood exceeds the predetermined trigger threshold subsequent to executing the automated mirror evasion maneuver.
Notes Figure 1, Choi invention teaches a side mirror control module (200) automatically controls the side mirrors of the vehicle [para. 0045-0065], a steering guide module (400) may include a guide indicator (430) may indicate an image that guides the steering of the vehicle in the counterclockwise direction on the side mirror of the vehicle, which has been lowered, as an example of a human machine interface (HMI) [para. 0094-0103].
Since the prior art references are both from the same field of endeavor, the purpose disclosed by Choi invention would have been recognized in the pertinent art of POHL.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be including the teaching of controlling the operation of steering system in response to the automated mirror evasion maneuver execution as taught by Choi into POHL invention for the purpose of easily perceive a potentially dangerous situation and consequently ensuring safety.
Regarding claim 2, as discussed in claim 1, the modified POHL invention further teaches the response processor further comprises a non-transitory processor-readable memory having one or more prediction models stored thereon [para. 0027-0028, POHL], and the mirror collision predictor is to compute the present likelihood of the imminent collision event by applying the one or more prediction models to the one or more sensor signals [para. 0053-0057, POHL].
POHL invention fails to specifically teach each of the one or more prediction models comprising a pre-trained machine learning network.
The use of non-transitory processor-readable memory is comprised a pre-trained machine learning network is so well-known in this art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to have provided the a non-transitory processor-readable memory having a pre-trained machine learning network, as is well-known in the art.
Regarding claim 3, as discussed and motivated in claim 2, the pre-trained machine learning network which have been considered to be teaching in POHL invention would have been known as a convolutional neural network.
Regarding claim 4, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches compute the present likelihood of the imminent collision event based on estimating a distance of one or more objects proximate to the one or more vehicle side-view mirrors based on monitoring the one or more sensor signals; and generate the trigger signal responsive to detecting that the distance is less than a predetermined threshold distance from the one or more vehicle side-view mirrors [see at least abstract and para. 0077].
Regarding claim 6, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches wherein the mirror collision predictor is to: compute the present likelihood of the imminent collision event based on estimating a passage width of a passage which the vehicle is approaching to enter based on monitoring the one or more sensor signals; and generate the trigger signal responsive to detecting that the passage width is narrower than a predetermined safe entry width that accounts for a largest width of the vehicle including the one or more vehicle side-view mirrors [para. 0071 teaches a system is provided that can detect if a car with extended mirrors is too wide and where putting them into a closed position aligned with the car can avoid crashes and having mirrors ripped off; and para. 0085 further teaches the lateral distance 643-1, 643-2 may be determined (e.g., measured, calculated, etc.) parallel to the lateral axis 611 (e.g., illustratively parallel to direction 101 and perpendicular to direction 103). In other words, the lateral distance 643-1, 643-2 may be determined (e.g., measured, calculated, etc.) along a direction perpendicular to the central vertical longitudinal plane 600v. The central vertical longitudinal plane 600v may be a symmetry plane of the vehicle 600, e.g., a body and/or a chassis of the vehicle 600 may be configured substantially symmetric (e.g., in in mirror symmetry) with respect to the central vertical longitudinal plane 600v.].
Regarding claim 7, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches wherein the one or more MCASs comprise at least one of an ultrasonic sensor, a RADAR sensor, or a LIDAR sensor, such that the one or more sensor signals comprise time-series distance data [para. 0030].
Regarding claim 8, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches wherein the one or more MCASs comprise a camera, such that the one or more sensor signals real-time image data [para. 0030].
Regarding claim 9, Regarding claim 7, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches wherein the motor controller and at least one of the one or more MCASs are integrated within a side-view assembly having mirror glass and a mirror housing [para. 0060].
Regarding claim 10, as discussed in claim 1, POHL invention further teaches wherein the response processor (540) is further integrated within the side-view mirror assembly (520) [Figure 5A illustrates the side mirror assembly (520) comprises a processor (540)].
Regarding claim 11, as discussed and modified in claim 1, note Figure 5A, POHL invention further describes a mirror housing, mirrors glass and mounting assembly (520) [para. 0049].
Regarding claim 12, as discussed and modified in claim 1, note Figure 5A, POHL invention further describes sensors (530) integrated with mirror housing.
Regarding claim 13, see discussion and motivation in claim 2.
Regarding claim 14, see discussion in claim 4.
Regarding claim 15, see discussion in claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, see discussion and motivation in claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, see discussion in claim 4.
Regarding claim 19, see discussion in claim 6.
Regarding claim 20, see discussion in claim 1 and further see para. 0002.
4. Claims 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over POHL in view of Choi, and further in view of KIM et al (US 2019/0031105 A1).
Regarding claim 5, as discussed in claim 1, the modified POHL fails to specifically teach compute the present likelihood of the imminent collision event based on the estimating a closing speed between one or more objects and the one or more vehicle side view mirror based on monitoring the one or more sensor signals; and generate the trigger signal responsive to detecting that the closing speed is greater than a predetermined threshold closing speed.
Notes para. 0150, KIM invention teaches the RADAR (320) may detect an object through the medium of an electromagnetic wave by employing a Time of Flight (TOF) scheme or a phase-shift scheme, and may detect a location, distance, and relative speed of the detected object; and para. 000162-0166 teach the calculation of the speed of an object around the vehicle and Figure 12 further describes S200 which compares the sensed speed of object to the predetermined threshold closing speed.
Since the references are both from the same field of endeavor, the purpose disclosed by KIM would have been recognized in the pertinent art of POHL in view of Choi invention.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to be including the teaching of estimating a closing speed between one or more objects which is used for triggering the signals as taught by KIM invention into the modified POHL invention for the purpose of easily perceive a potentially dangerous situation and consequently ensuring safety.
Regarding claim 18, see discussion and motivation in claim 5.
Response to Amendment
5. Applicant’s arguments filed November 3, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Notes Figure 1, Choi invention clearly describes the amended claims by adding the limitation “the vehicle controller output configured to operate a steering system in response to determining that the present likelihood exceeds the predetermined trigger threshold subsequent to executing the automated mirror evasion maneuver” in order to modify the apparatus and method for assisting driving of vehicle for the purpose of providing a safety of the automated vehicle.
Conclusion
6. 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 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.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHNNY H HOANG whose telephone number is (571) 272-4843. The examiner can normally be reached on [Monday-Friday [Maxi-Flex]].
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, Logan Kraft can be reached on (571) 270-5065. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JHH/
January 9, 2026
/LOGAN M KRAFT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/Johnny H. Hoang/
Examiner, Art Unit 3747