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 .
Prosecution Reopened
Applicant's request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 5-6 and 8-9 have been considered but are moot due to a new grounds for rejection.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soltanian et al. (U.S. 20200031337).
In re claim 1, Soltanian teaches a method comprising:
receiving and recording, by a plurality of microphones arranged on an autonomous vehicle, a sound generated by a sound source (fig. 3; step 75, detect, exterior sound (e.g. siren or sound of a motorcycle, etc.); a method can detect and recognize sounds from other objects outside of the vehicle such as motorcycles or people or weather events such as rain and can cause autonomous or assisted driving functionality to be implemented in response to the detection of such exterior sounds; [0005]);
determining, based on the recorded sound, that the sound source is a two- wheeled vehicle (as explained above);
determining a direction or position of the sound source relative to the autonomous vehicle using a delay in reception of the sound at one of the plurality of microphones (a circular array or other arrays of microphones on the exterior of the vehicle can be used to determine the direction of the sound source (such as an angle relative to the direction of travel of the vehicle) which can then be used to determine the direction of travel of the emergency vehicle; [0029]) relative to another of the plurality of microphones (the processing system is to determine a delay in sounds at different sounds sensors arranged around the exterior of the vehicle to determine a direction of another vehicle; [claim 11]);
determining the autonomous vehicle is in a traffic jam or slow-moving traffic and the two-wheeled vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic (Motorcycles produce known sounds that can be recognized by known sound recognition systems and/or algorithms, and the recognition of the sound of a motorcycle can be used in the embodiments of assisted driving described herein. For example, many times when cars are stopped along a road because of a traffic jam, motorcycles will attempt to drive between the cars in order to avoid the traffic jam. This can present a hazard to both the cars and the motorcycles when a driver of a car attempts to make a lane change as the motorcycle approaches. The detection of the sounds of the motorcycle or other vehicle can be combined with images from one or more cameras and data from a LIDAR sensor to confirm the presence of the motorcycle or other vehicle. The images can be processed using known algorithms to recognize a rider on a motorcycle which can confirm the presence of the motorcycle detected via its sounds; [0030]); and
adapting, responsive to the determination that the autonomous vehicle is in the traffic jam or in the slow-moving traffic and that the emergency vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than the other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic, driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle by moving the autonomous vehicle in a transverse direction to allow the emergency vehicle to pass the autonomous vehicle (fig. 2; fig. 4a, step 111, optionally provide autonomous vehicle control (e.g. pull vehicle over to side of road and stop); [0035]; determining a direction of arrival and if possible a time of arrival of the emergency vehicle; presenting a warning of the approaching emergency vehicle, where the warning can include a warning on a display screen and also announcing the warning through the vehicle's speakers; the method can also include providing autonomous driving to control the vehicle to cause it to pull over to the side of the road and stop; [0007])
Soltanian lacks explicitly stating
adapting, responsive to the determination that the autonomous vehicle is in the traffic jam or in the slow-moving traffic and that the two-wheeled vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than the other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic, driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle by moving the autonomous vehicle in a transverse direction to allow the two-wheeled vehicle to pass the autonomous vehicle.
However, the examiner believes that one having an ordinary level of skill in the art would have found it obvious that a motorcycle can also be an emergency vehicle. The examiner also believes that it is generally known by those in the art that some police/ law enforcement officers do ride/use motorcycles as their official duty vehicle, and are often used as part of a motorcade escort (such as that escorting the president/vice president of the United States), highway patrol, etc. Additionally, the examiner also believes that it is generally known that there is a television series/movie (CHIPS) that is focused on law enforcement officers that use motorcycles as their official patrol vehicles. The examiner believes that it is generally known by those having an ordinary level of skill in the art that there are emergency vehicles, which are also motorcycles. The examiner also believes that one having an ordinary level of skill in the art would also be aware that there is a legal requirement for a vehicle to pull over to the side of the road and stop when an emergency vehicle is driving through a traffic jam or slow-moving traffic. This being the case, the examiner believes that it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary level of skill in the art to the combine the teachings presented in Soltanian, such that, in the case that a two wheeled vehicle (i.e. a motorcycle) is also an emergency vehicle (such as a police motorcycle), to adapt the driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle by moving the autonomous vehicle in a transverse direction to allow the two-wheeled vehicle to pass the autonomous vehicle.
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Soltanian, such that/to incorporate adapting, responsive to the determination that the autonomous vehicle is in the traffic jam or in the slow-moving traffic and that the two-wheeled vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than the other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic, driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle by moving the autonomous vehicle in a transverse direction to allow the two-wheeled vehicle to pass the autonomous vehicle, as taught by Soltanian and explained above, in order to comply with the legal requirement for a vehicle to pull over to the side of the road and stop when an emergency vehicle, such as a police motorcycle, is driving through a traffic jam or slow-moving traffic.
In re claim 2, Soltanian teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
checking or correcting the determined direction or position taking into account a world model created using data recorded by an environment sensor system of the autonomous vehicle or map information from a digital map and which contains information about objects on which the sound is reflected (The detection of the sounds of the motorcycle or other vehicle can be combined with images from one or more cameras and data from a LIDAR sensor to confirm the presence of the motorcycle or other vehicle. Similarly, the detection of exterior sounds from people in the vicinity of the vehicle can cause other components of the vehicle (e.g., cameras, radar, or LIDAR) to perform assisted driving functions or features such as attempting to detect the location of the people and visually detect the people making the sounds in order to prevent a collision between the people and the vehicle; [0005]; the warning can include a street map that shows the location on the street map of the vehicle and the other vehicle, and the street map can be similar to the view shown in FIG. 1 which allows the user of the vehicle to see the approach of the other vehicle such as the emergency vehicle 16 shown in FIG. 1. A warning with such a street map can be provided when the set of sensors (such as an array of microphones, a set of one or more cameras, and a LIDAR sensor and/or radar sensor) provide enough data to the set of one or more processing systems to enable the set of one or more processing systems to locate the other vehicle relative to the street map and place the other vehicle on the street map which also shows the vehicle having the set of sensors. The street map can be updated over time as the locations of the vehicle and the other vehicle change. Typically, radar sensors and a LIDAR can provide enough data in many instances to allow a location determination relative to a street map assuming the navigation system of the vehicle has determined the location and path of travel of the vehicle relative to the street map; [0038] and as suggested in [0034]; Here, the combination of camera, radar, lidar data along with sound data, and a street map constitute a world model, wherein position/direction data is then updated overtime (which includes checking and correcting the position/direction data in the model, otherwise the model would remain static and thus unable to be updated over time)).
In re claim 5, Soltanian teaches an autonomous vehicle comprising:
a plurality of microphones configured to receive and record a sound generated by a sound source (as indicated in fig. 6 and explained in claim 1 above; note: four microphones are shown in fig. 6); and
a controller (as shown in fig. 5-6; data processing system(s) 161, assisted driving processor(s) 177) coupled to the plurality of microphones and configured to determine, based on the recorded sound, that the sound source is a two- wheeled vehicle (as explained in claim 1 above);
determine a direction or position of the sound source relative to the autonomous vehicle using a delay in reception of the sound at one of the plurality of microphones relative to another of the plurality of microphones (as explained in claim 1 above);
determine the autonomous vehicle is in a traffic jam or slow-moving traffic and the two-wheeled vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic (as explained in claim 1 above); and
adapt, responsive to the determination that the autonomous vehicle is in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic and that the two-wheeled vehicle is moving at a higher relative speed than the other vehicles in the traffic jam or the slow-moving traffic, driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle by moving the autonomous vehicle in a transverse direction to allow the two-wheeled vehicle to pass the autonomous vehicle (as explained in claim 1 above).
In re claim 6, Soltanian teaches the autonomous vehicle of claim 5, wherein the autonomous vehicle is a commercial vehicle (other motorized vehicle as suggested in [0039]), passenger car (The vehicle can be a car or SUV or other motorized vehicle; [0039]), or a bus (other motorized vehicle as suggested in [0039]).
In re claim 8, Soltanian teaches the autonomous vehicle of claim 5, wherein the plurality of microphones include at least four microphones (as indicated in fig. 6, fig. 8c; data processing system 175 can include a set of microphones arranged on the exterior surface of the vehicle. In the example of FIG. 6 there are four microphones 179, 181, 182, and 183 arranged on the exterior surface of the vehicle; [0040]; from the top view it can be seen that there are four microphones 310, 312, 314, and 316 arranged around the exterior surface of the vehicle 301 as shown in FIG. 8C; [0043]; note: four microphones shown).
In re claim 9, Soltanian teaches the autonomous vehicle of claim 8, wherein a first two of the at least four microphones are arranged on a left side of a cabin of the autonomous vehicle and a second two of the at least four microphones are arranged on a right side of the cabin of the autonomous vehicle (as shown in fig. 8c and explained in claim 8 above).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOHN D BAILEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5692. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 at 571-270-5625. 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.
/JOHN D BAILEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/KURT PHILIP LIETHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights