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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 18/633,069 filed on 04/11/2024 were examined. Examiner filed an non-final office action on 08/25/2025.
Applicant filed remarks and amendment on 10/15/2025. Claims 1- 20 are amended. Claims 1- 20 are presently pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103: Applicant's arguments filed 10/15/2025with respect to Bansal et al. (US10816348B2) in view of Ikushima (US20240031905A1) have been fully considered but they are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James et al . (US20160355192A1) in view of Nölscher et al. (US20200029209A1), hereinafter referred to as James and Nölscher respectively.
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 14, James discloses A method comprising:
initiating, at one or more vehicles, a state transition from a first automated vehicle marshaling (AVM) feature state of a plurality of AVM feature states to a second AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states based on a message uniquely associated with the second AVM feature state (“In one respect, the present disclosure is directed to a method of transitioning a vehicle between a first operational mode and a second operational mode.” [003]),
and causing the one or more vehicles to revert to the first AVM feature state (“The vehicle 100 can be configured to be switched between the various operational modes. Such switching can be implemented in any suitable manner, now known or later developed. The switching can be performed automatically, or it can be done responsive to receiving a manual input or request.” [0018])
James does not explicitly teach wherein the message is received from an infrastructure system,
processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the first AVM feature state to the second AVM feature state
in response to an unsuccessful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state
However, Nölscher does teach wherein the message is received from an infrastructure system (“Thus, vehicle 102 can receive data from and transmit data to remote server 662 via peer nodes 660-N through 660-2 using peer-to-peer file sharing techniques, even when vehicle 102 lacks a connection to wide area network to which remote server 662 is connected.” [0027]);
processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the first AVM feature state to the second AVM feature state (“In embodiments, as discussed in greater detail below, the discovery and handshaking process are used by each node (e.g., vehicle 102 and the other network nodes, such as 160 or 170) to broadcast messages for discovering other nodes of the network, verify each other's identity, establish that each has access to certain shared information (e.g., a network encryption key), and establish session encryption keys or other connection parameters (e.g., wireless communication channel parameters) for all communications exchanged between the vehicle 102 and the network node (160 or 170) after the handshaking process is performed.” [0025]);
in response to an unsuccessful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state (“n another embodiment, the vehicle can have its own certificate authority that issues temporary certificates. This may be beneficial in the event that the network encryption key is ever compromised. The temporary certificates would again be part of the certificate chain to a root certificate of the manufacturer. Thus, the manufacturer could revoke certificates periodically, in response to user requests, in response to certain events (e.g., detected data and/or security breaches, detected malicious activity, etc.), etc.” [0056]). Both James and Nölscher teach vehicle communication and control methods. James does not explicitly disclose wherein the message is received from an infrastructure system, processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the first AVM feature state to the second AVM feature state and in response to an unsuccessful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle communication and control method of James to also include wherein the message is received from an infrastructure system, processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the first AVM feature state to the second AVM feature state and in response to an unsuccessful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state, as taught by Nölscher, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves vehicle marshalling method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nölscher, 0025-0027 and 0056]).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 15, James discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of AVM feature states includes an un-initiated state, a pre-onboarding state, an on-boarding state, a marshaling state, a de-boarding state, and an off-boarding state (James discloses a plurality of states including manual (un-initiated), monitored autonomous (pre-onboarding/on-boarding), unmonitored autonomous (marshaling) and controlled stop (de-boarding). “the second operational mode can have a lesser degree of manual involvement than the first operational mode. A “lesser degree of manual involvement” means that a human driver can decrease his or her level of supervision and/or input with respect to the control of at least the navigation and/or maneuvering of the vehicle. One example of when the second operational mode can have a lesser degree of manual involvement than the first operational mode is when the first operational mode is a manual operational mode, and the second operational mode is a semi-autonomous operational mode, a monitored autonomous operational mode, or an unmonitored autonomous operational mode. Another example is when the first operational mode is a monitored operational mode, and the second operational mode is an unmonitored operational mode.”[0020]
“The vehicle 100 can have a special operational mode. “Special operational mode” means that, if a requested human driver action is not taken or confirmed within a predetermined amount of time, the navigation and/or maneuvering of the vehicle can be controlled by one or more computing systems to implement one or more safety maneuvers. The safety maneuver can be a predetermined safety maneuver based on the current driving environment. For instance, if a human driver does not take control of the vehicle 100 within a predetermined amount of time, the safety maneuver may include moving the vehicle 100 to the side of the road, moving the vehicle 100 onto the shoulder of the road, reducing the speed of the vehicle 100, turning the vehicle 100 into the nearest parking lot, bringing the vehicle 100 to a stop, keeping the vehicle 100 stopped, or having the vehicle 100 take the next exit on a highway, just to name a few possibilities.” [0017]).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 16, James discloses The method of claim 1, wherein an external handshake protocol varies based on each of the plurality of AVM feature states such that one or more characteristics of the external handshake protocol varies based on each of the plurality of AVM feature states (Furthermore, the communications reach of vehicle 102 is therefore extended geographically (e.g., vehicle 102 being connected via intermediate nodes to node 660-N which is out of direct communication range), and logically (e.g., remote server 662 being accessible by node 660-N via a cellular or hard-wired network connection, where vehicle 102 can access node 660-N via the peer-to-peer network)……….. in response to a monitored road or traffic condition that vehicle 102 has not yet encountered but which is on vehicle's 102 route of travel, data exchanges including those generated by a remote manufacturer or service server (e.g., server 662) ………. partial or incremental data transfers using peer-to-peer data sharing protocols (e.g., a node may receive/request a portion of data (e.g., a portion of firmware update) …………….. as well as other exchanges of data using the peer-to-peer network 600 and the connection of at least one peer to remote server 662.” [0028]),
and wherein processing the external handshake protocol comprises:
wherein the one or more characteristics of the external handshake protocol includes an inter-transmit time associated with the message, a tolerance threshold of a connection strength associated with the one or more vehicles, or a combination thereof (“The vehicle 100 can have a special operational mode. “Special operational mode” means that, if a requested human driver action is not taken or confirmed within a predetermined amount of time, the navigation and/or maneuvering of the vehicle can be controlled by one or more computing systems to implement one or more safety maneuvers. The safety maneuver can be a predetermined safety maneuver based on the current driving environment.” [0017]).
James does not explicitly teach initiating one or more actions based on a message exchange between the infrastructure system and the one or more vehicles, wherein the one or more actions includes a verification of a wireless connection associated with the one or more vehicles, an authentication of the message, a validation of whether the one or more vehicles are within an operational design domain, or a combination thereof
However, Nölscher does teach initiating one or more actions based on a message exchange between the infrastructure system and the one or more vehicles, wherein the one or more actions includes a verification of a wireless connection associated with the one or more vehicles, an authentication of the message, a validation of whether the one or more vehicles are within an operational design domain, or a combination thereof (“In embodiments, the peer-to-peer network 600 relies on the broadcast message exchange, handshaking process (e.g., identify and authority verification, parameter proposal exchange, and session key establishment) to secure the channels of communication between peers in the network 600. For example, vehicle 102 performs the handshaking process with each of the nodes (e.g., nodes 660-1 and 660-2), to which vehicle is directly connected, to establish trust and a secure communications channel with each node.” [0026]). Both James and Nölscher teach vehicle communication and control methods. James does not explicitly disclose initiating one or more actions based on a message exchange between the infrastructure system and the one or more vehicles, wherein the one or more actions includes a verification of a wireless connection associated with the one or more vehicles, an authentication of the message, a validation of whether the one or more vehicles are within an operational design domain, or a combination thereof.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle communication and control method of James to also include initiating one or more actions based on a message exchange between the infrastructure system and the one or more vehicles, wherein the one or more actions includes a verification of a wireless connection associated with the one or more vehicles, an authentication of the message, a validation of whether the one or more vehicles are within an operational design domain, or a combination thereof, as taught by Nölscher, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves vehicle marshalling method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nölscher, 0025-0027]).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 17, James discloses The method of claim 1,
James does not explicitly teach wherein each AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states is associated with a different message
However, Nölscher does teach wherein each AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states is associated with a different message (“In embodiments, processing block 302 is performed periodically (e.g., each time vehicle is turned on, at a present time interval, etc.). Furthermore, each of the identifier(s), encryption key(s), security certificate(s) may be generated at different intervals. For example, vehicle identifiers for wireless communication sessions may be established every hour regardless of whether the vehicle is turned on/off, while a security certificate is generated by processing logic each time the vehicle is started on a new day, after 24 hours if the vehicle is not turned off before that time passes, or in another periodic interval that may be different from that in which the vehicle identifiers are established.” [0045]). Both James and Nölscher teach vehicle communication and control methods. James does not explicitly disclose wherein each AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states is associated with a different message.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle communication and control method of James to also include wherein each AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states is associated with a different message, as taught by Nölscher, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves vehicle marshalling method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nölscher, 0045]).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 18, James discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: causing the one or more vehicles to progress to the second AVM feature state, from the first AVM feature state (“The vehicle 100 can be configured to be switched between the various operational modes. Such switching can be implemented in any suitable manner, now known or later developed. The switching can be performed automatically, or it can be done responsive to receiving a manual input or request.” [0018]),
James does not explicitly teach based on a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state
However, Nölscher does teach based on a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state (“In embodiments, the peer-to-peer network 600 relies on the broadcast message exchange, handshaking process (e.g., identify and authority verification, parameter proposal exchange, and session key establishment) to secure the channels of communication between peers in the network 600. For example, vehicle 102 performs the handshaking process with each of the nodes (e.g., nodes 660-1 and 660-2), to which vehicle is directly connected, to establish trust and a secure communications channel with each node.” [0026]). Both James and Nölscher teach vehicle communication and control methods. James does not explicitly disclose based on a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle communication and control method of James to also include based on a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state, as taught by Nölscher, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves vehicle marshalling method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nölscher, 0025-0027]).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, James discloses The method of claim 5, further comprising:
initiating, at the one or more vehicles, a state transition from the second AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states to a third AVM feature state of the plurality of AVM feature states based on the progression to the second AVM feature state and on a message uniquely associated with the third AVM feature state (“The vehicle 100 can be configured to be switched between the various operational modes. Such switching can be implemented in any suitable manner, now known or later developed. The switching can be performed automatically, or it can be done responsive to receiving a manual input or request.” [0018]);
James does not explicitly teach processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the second AVM feature state to the third AVM feature state
and causing, the one or more vehicles, to progress to the third AVM feature state in response to a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state
However, Nölscher does teach processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the second AVM feature state to the third AVM feature state(“In embodiments, as discussed in greater detail below, the discovery and handshaking process are used by each node (e.g., vehicle 102 and the other network nodes, such as 160 or 170) to broadcast messages for discovering other nodes of the network, verify each other's identity, establish that each has access to certain shared information (e.g., a network encryption key), and establish session encryption keys or other connection parameters (e.g., wireless communication channel parameters) for all communications exchanged between the vehicle 102 and the network node (160 or 170) after the handshaking process is performed.” [0025]);
and causing, the one or more vehicles, to progress to the third AVM feature state in response to a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state (“In embodiments, the peer-to-peer network 600 relies on the broadcast message exchange, handshaking process (e.g., identify and authority verification, parameter proposal exchange, and session key establishment) to secure the channels of communication between peers in the network 600. For example, vehicle 102 performs the handshaking process with each of the nodes (e.g., nodes 660-1 and 660-2), to which vehicle is directly connected, to establish trust and a secure communications channel with each node.” [0026]). Both James and Nölscher teach vehicle communication and control methods. James does not explicitly disclose processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the second AVM feature state to the third AVM feature state and causing, the one or more vehicles, to progress to the third AVM feature state in response to a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle communication and control method of James to also include processing, by the one or more vehicles, a handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state in response to the initiation of the state transition from the second AVM feature state to the third AVM feature state and causing, the one or more vehicles, to progress to the third AVM feature state in response to a successful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the third AVM feature state, as taught by Nölscher, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves vehicle marshalling method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nölscher, 0025-0027 and 0056]).
Regarding claims 7 and 20, James discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting an alert to the infrastructure system associated with the unsuccessful completion of the handshake protocol associated with the second AVM feature state, wherein the transmission of the alert is based on a reversion of the one or more vehicles to the first AVM feature state (“According to arrangements herein, the vehicle 100 can be configured to provide a vehicle occupant (e.g., the driver) with a running indication of the amount of time remaining before the vehicle 100 potentially switches to a different operational mode, particularly one that has a greater degree of manual involvement. Such an indication can be provided by a transition alert. The transition alert can be output within the vehicle 100.” [0083]).
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 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 AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
AHMED ALKIRSHExaminer, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights