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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant submitted amendments and remarks on September 25, 2025. Therein, Applicant submitted substantive arguments. Claims 5-7 were added. Claims 1-4 were cancelled.
Applicant has made adequate amendments to claim 1 in order to eliminate claim language that could be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 101. Therefore, these rejections are withdrawn.
The submitted claims are considered below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a travel route provisional determination unit configured to provisionally determine […] a travel route”, a travel route re-determination unit configured to compare the estimated arrival time”, “a target stop position determination unit configured to determine a stop position”, “a travel permission area management unit configured to manage a travel permitted area”, “a management information creation unit configured to create management information”, “a management communication device configured to transmit the management information”, “a moving object communication device configured to receive the management information”, “a traveling-state control unit configured to control a traveling device”, “a work executing unit control unit configured to control a work executing unit” and “a moving object information creation unit configured to generate the moving object information” in claim 5 and “drive device is configure to consume less energy” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 5, “travel route provisional determination unit”, “travel route re-determination unit”, “target stop position determination unit”, “travel permission area management unit”, “management information creation unit”, “management communication device”, “moving object communication device configured to receive the management information”, “a traveling-state control unit configured to control a traveling device”, “work executing unit control unit configured to control a work executing unit” and “moving object information creation unit configured to generate the moving object information” in claim 5 are not described in the Specification as it fails to describe the structure of each unit as stated in the 112(f) claim interpretation. As a result it is unclear what structure is intended to be used for performing the claimed function.
Regarding claim 7, “drive device” is not described in the Specification as it fails to describe the structure of each unit as stated in the 112(f) claim interpretation. As a result it is unclear what structure is intended to be used for performing the claimed function.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 is included by virtue of its dependency on claim 5.
Claim limitations “a travel route provisional determination unit configured to provisionally determine […] a travel route”, a travel route re-determination unit configured to compare the estimated arrival time”, “a target stop position determination unit configured to determine a stop position”, “a travel permission area management unit configured to manage a travel permitted area”, “a management information creation unit configured to create management information”, “a management communication device configured to transmit the management information”, “a moving object communication device configured to receive the management information”, “a traveling-state control unit configured to control a traveling device”, “a work executing unit control unit configured to control a work executing unit” and “a moving object information creation unit configured to generate the moving object information”, and “drive device is configure to consume less energy” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the functions in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
For the purpose of the prior art rejection below, the term “travel route provisional determination unit” has been interpreted as
For the purpose of the prior art rejection below, the term “travel route provisional determination unit” has been interpreted as “route planner”, the term “travel route re-determination unit” has been interpreted as “timing traveling scheduler, the term “target stop position determination unit” has been interpreted as “travel management device”, the term “travel permission area management unit” has been interpreted as “management control unit”, the term “management information creation unit” has been interpreted as “route planner”, the term “management communication device” has been interpreted as “communicator”, the term “moving object communication device” has been interpreted as “communicator”, the term “traveling-state control unit” has been interpreted as “speed presenting unit”, the term “work executing unit control unit” has been interpreted as “travel management device”, the term “moving object information creation unit” has been interpreted as “state detector”, and the term “drive device” has been interpreted as “vehicle control device”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
For the purposes of the prior art rejections below,
the term “travel route provisional determination unit” has been interpreted to be “route planner”.
the term “travel route re-determination unit” has been interpreted to be “timing traveling scheduler.
the term “target stop position determination unit” has been interpreted to be “travel management device”.
the term “travel permission area management unit” has been interpreted to be “management control unit”.
the term “management information creation unit” has been interpreted to be “route planner”.
the term “management communication device” has been interpreted to be “communicator”.
the term “moving object communication device” has been interpreted to be “communicator”.
the term “traveling-state control unit” has been interpreted to be “speed presenting unit”.
the term “work executing unit control unit” has been interpreted to be “travel management device”.
the term “moving object information creation unit” has been interpreted to be “state detector”.
and the term “drive device” has been interpreted to be “vehicle control device”.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aisu (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) and further in view of Kanai, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9804606).
Regarding claim 5, Aisu teaches: A management system configured to manage movement of a plurality of moving objects, the management system comprising: (Col. 3, lines 6-10: "The entire system configuration includes a travel planning system (1) [management system], a plurality of mobile objects (or mobile entities) 301_1 to 301_N) [movement of plurality of moving objects]")
a management ECU including: (Col. 3, lines 12-13: "The travel planning system (1) includes […] a travel management device (200) [management ECU].")
a first execution unit; (Col. 12, lines 11-16: "The travel management device (200) includes a controller which manages execution of the move mentcommand data (execution of the command) first execution unit].")
a first storage unit; (Col. 12, lines 28-30: "the travel management device (200) detects and stores identification information (ID) of the mobile object [first storage unit]")
a travel route provisional determination unit configured to provisionally determine, for each of the plurality of moving objects, (Col. 6, lines 47-51: "…route planner (109) generates a route plan [provisional travel route determination unit] designating passing order of a plurality of designated areas which each mobile object passes through on the basis of content of work to be done by each mobile object determined in advance and information regarding order of the work [provisional determination]")
a travel route having a shortest time required from a current position to a destination according to a predetermined algorithm, wherein the travel route is determined based on at least one of a number of corner nodes to the destination, a distance of the travel route, and a possibility of approaching an obstacle, (Col. 23, lines 6-9: "…by applying a search method called heuristic optimal solution search algorithm ("A search"), it is possible to obtain a timing schedule with high evaluation in a short period of time [shortest time required to go from position to destination according to predetermined algorithm]." ; Col. 23, lines 15-18: "Specifically, a sum of the remaining traveling distances in the route plans of the respective mobile objects is calculated for time after time at which conflict is avoided last in the timing schedule set [based on distance of travel route].")
an estimated arrival time, based on the travel route and current time, at which each of the plurality of moving objects is expected to arrive, (Col. 12, line 65 to Col. 13, lines 1-2: "(First example) Time (estimated arrival time) at which each mobile object arrives at the designated area in the travel timing schedule of each mobile object [estimated arrival time parameters based on travel route and current time]")
a maximum speed in the travel route, (Col. 7, line 66 to Col. 8, lines 1-3: "The specific information of the mobile objects may include, for example, specification information of the mobile objects, such as […] maximum speed [maximum speed in travel route]")
an expected arrival time acquiring unit configured, for each of the plurality of moving objects, to acquire the expected arrival time, based on the current time and a required time to the destination (Col. 8, lines 15-25: "The travel timing scheduler (105) [expected arrival time acquiring unit] generates a travel timing schedule so that conflict (a collision or deadlock) does not occur for each mobile object [plurality of moving objects] […] The travel timing schedule includes information for specifying arrival time or departure time for each designated area as an example. There are, for example, time of arrival at the designated area, time of departure from the designated area, a length of a period spent (i.e., staying) in the designated area, a length of period for moving between the designated areas, or the like [acquire expected arrival time based on current time and require time to destination].")
and a travel route re-determination unit configured to (Col. 8, lines 35-38: "The travel timing scheduler (105) regenerates a travel timing schedule of each mobile object in a case where it is determined to regenerate a travel timing schedule by the replan determiner (108) [travel route re-determination unit]")
compare the estimated arrival time of each of the corresponding plurality of moving objects, (Col. 12, lines 50-53: "The replan determiner (108) compares the travel plan stored in the travel plan storage (103) with the traveling state of the mobile object detected by the state detector (202), and determines whether or not to perform replan [re-determination protocol]."; Col. 12, line 65 to Col. 13, lines 1-2: "Time (estimated arrival time) at which each mobile object arrives at the designated area in the travel timing schedule of each mobile object […] is compared with the traveling state of each mobile object [specific example - compare estimated arrival time of plurality of moving objects].")
determine and set a latest time of arrival of a first moving object among the plurality of moving object at the destination as a reference time, (Col. 12, lines 65-67: "Time (estimated arrival time) at which each mobile object arrives at the designated area in the travel timing schedule of each mobile object [time of arrival of mobile object - methodology]" ; Col. 13, lines 6-10: "Then, at a time point at which it is determined that the mobile object cannot arrive by the estimated arrival time or the mobile object will be delayed by equal to or longer than a threshold time length for the estimated arrival time [threshold time for arrival - reference time]")
and set the first moving object to travel the shortest-time travel route determined by the travel route provisional determination unit, (Col. 9, lines 60-67: "Still further, if the mobile objects are directed to conveyance of package, the standard speed may be corrected to faster [object can travel faster speed - shortest-time travel route] or slower while the mobile objects convey package […] The travel timing scheduler (105) calculates a movement period length so as to satisfy conditions regarding speed as stated in the above [calculated by travel route provisional determination unit].")
and redetermine, for a second and subsequent moving objects among the plurality of moving objects with an expected arrival time is earlier than the reference time, the travel route so that an expected arrival time of the second and subsequent moving objects to the destination approaches the reference time (Col. 12, lines 17-27: "…the travel management device (200) causes the AGV (0) to wait at a position before the designated area or distant from the designated area until the AGV (2) passes in a case where the AGV (0) may first arrive at the designated area through which the AGV (2) is required to pass first [moving objects in which expected arrival time is earlier than reference time]. Alternatively, the travel management device (200) adjusts speed of the AGV (0) to delay arrival time (passing time) of the AGV (0) at the designated area. The control is performed by a wait command or a speed adjustment command (for example, a speed reduction command) being transmitted to the mobile object [overall statement - determines adjusted route/speed to bring arrival time closer to reference time].")
within a range in which the expected arrival time is not later than the reference time, by adjusting at least one of the travel route, the maximum speed, and the maximum acceleration, (Col. 13, lines 26-31: "For example, in a case where the mobile object which should precede will be late for the estimated arrival time even if the mobile object moves on the traveling path at maximum speed, it can be judged that delay by equal to or longer than a threshold time length is determined [range in which expected arrival time is adjusted based on maximum speed - conditions]." ; Col. 13, lines 36-44: "That is, the mobile object operates in accordance with the travel plan before update (timing schedule before update) until the mobile object reaches the update position, and, after the mobile object reaches the update position, operates in accordance with the updated travel plan (updated timing schedule) [update or adjustment].")
a target stop position determination unit configured to determine a stop position at the destination for each of the plurality of moving objects, (Col. 11, lines 25-32: "The travel management device (200) [target stop position determination unit] may sequentially repeat to transmit a command which instructs each mobile object to depart from the designated area in which the mobile object waits, and a command which designates the designated area in which the mobile object should stop for waiting next, to each mobile object, on the basis of each piece of movement command data [stop position at destination for each of plurality of moving objects].")
and a management information creation unit configured to create management information determined by the travel route provisional determination unit, the expected arrival time acquiring unit, and the travel route re-determination unit; (Col. 14, lines 4-7: "The route planner (109) [management information creation unit] generates a route plan starting from the update position of each mobile object for each mobile object in a case where it is determined by the replan determiner (108) to perform replan [creates management information as a function of replan through various units].")
a management communication device configured to transmit the management information to each of the plurality of moving objects and receive moving-object information transmitted from each of the plurality of moving objects; (Col. 10, line 67 to Col. 11, lines 1-5: "The travel management device (200) receives the movement command data of each mobile object from the communicator (110) [management communication device; receives moving object information] of the travel planning device (100) via the communicator (201) and transmits the movement command data to each mobile object [transmits moving object information to moving objects].")
a moving object communication device configured to receive the management information and transmit the moving-object information; (Col. 25, lines 27-30: "Other mobile objects include […] a communicator (310). The communicator (310) performs wireless communication with other mobile objects [moving object communication device configured to receive management information and transmit moving-object information].")
and a moving object ECU mounted in each of the plurality of moving objects, the moving object ECU including: (Fig. 16, Col. 25, lines 25-27: "FIG. 16 illustrates an example of an entire system configuration including a travel planning system according to a third embodiment [...] at least one mobile object includes functions corresponding to the travel planning device (or the travel planning system) [moving object ECU]")
a second execution unit; (Col. 25, lines 27-29: "Other mobile objects include a route planner (309) [second execution unit]")
a second storage unit; (Col. 25, lines 27-29: "Other mobile objects include […] a route plan storage (302) [second storage unit]")
a work executing unit control unit configured to control a work executing unit based on work contents determined by a predetermined plan; (Col. 14, lines 63-67: "The travel management device (200) [work executing unit control unit] manages execution for causing each mobile object to travel and manages the traveling state of each mobile object in accordance with the movement command data of each mobile object received from the travel planning device (100) [controls work executing unit based on predetermined plan]")
and a moving object information creation unit configured to generate the moving object information including present position information obtained by a global positioning system (GPS) receiver (Col. 15, lines 62-67: "…state detector (202) [moving object information creation unit] may acquire the position information estimated by the mobile object via the communicator (201) or the communication device (501). Examples of the self-position estimation may include estimation using means such as […] GPS [generating moving object information obtained by GPS receiver].").
Aisu does not teach and a maximum acceleration based on the maximum speed and a shape of the travel route; and energy consumption is reduced, a traveling-state control unit configured to control a traveling device of each of the plurality of moving object based on a command transmitted from a management device, the traveling device including a drive device having an electric motor, a braking device, and a steering device.
In a similar field of endeavor (navigation planning estimation), Morita, et al. teaches: and a maximum acceleration based on the maximum speed and a shape of the travel route; (Fig. 15, As shown on adjoining table underneath figure: "Explanation- Maximum Acceleration In Case Of Gasoline-Powered Vehicle Changing Recommended Speed In Direction Of Acceleration [Max acceleration based on max speed with respect to shape, or direction of route]")
and energy consumption is reduced, (Col. 29, lines 48-57: "…the recommended speed presentation device can present the recommended speed at which the self-vehicle can travel with safety and with a small amount of energy consumption according to various road states in the traveling route. Therefore, the recommended speed presentation device enables the driver to drive the self-vehicle with safety and with a small amount of energy consumption as long as the driver drives the self-vehicle according to this recommended speed [reduce energy consumption].")
a traveling-state control unit configured to control a traveling device of each of the plurality of moving object based on a command transmitted from a management device, the traveling device including a drive device having an electric motor, a braking device, and a steering device (Col. 4, lines 4-8: "…FIG. 1, the recommended speed presentation device in accordance with Embodiment 1 is mounted in, for example, a vehicle (referred to as a self vehicle from here on) as a vehicle-mounted information device [traveling state control unit which controls management of parameters]" ; Col. 8, line 62 to Col. 9, lines 1-4: "...an electric vehicle [...] Therefore, the parameter for determining the speed variation function for each vehicle type is disposed in the parameter setting unit (22) so that a speed variation according to the type of the vehicle can be implemented [management of electric motor]." ; Col. 16, lines 18-22: "the road-geometry-based recommended speed arithmetic unit (13) determines whether the self-vehicle will make a right or left turn at the intersection from the result of following the traveling route along the road (step ST6d) [management of steering device]." ; Col. 30, lines 63-67: "When receiving the above-mentioned request from the recommended speed presenting unit (8), the vehicle control device controls the engine power, the brake, or both of them to slow down the self-vehicle to a speed close to the recommended speed (step ST4h) [management of braking device and motor].")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aisu to include the teaching of Morita, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the navigation of moving objects with respect to an optimal energy consumption rate (Morita, et al. Col. 1, lines 8-13).
The combination of Aisu and Morita, et al. does not teach a travel permission area management unit configured to manage a travel permitted area at each of a plurality of nodes absent with a traffic light so that two or more of the plurality of moving objects can enter to the corresponding node.
In a similar field of endeavor (management control of multiple vehicles), Kanai, et al. teaches: a travel permission area management unit configured to manage a travel permitted area at each of a plurality of nodes absent with a traffic light so that two or more of the plurality of moving objects can enter to the corresponding node (Col. 7, lines 64-67: "a management control unit (320) for deciding a destination of the dump truck (20) and a travel path leading to it and for performing traffic control so that the dump trucks may not interfere with one another [purpose to perform management without traffic lights]" ; Col. 8, lines 17-22: "The management control unit (320) includes […] a travel permission section management unit (323) [provides nodes for proper vehicle travel], […] and an overtaking path generation unit (326) [provides nodes in which plurality of vehicles can enter node area]." ; Col. 9, lines 8-11: "The travel permission section management unit (323) decides a section length of the travel permission section based on the numbers of nodes and links included in the travel permission section [example - provides nodes for proper vehicle travel]." ; Col. 20, lines 2-20: "The overtaking path generation unit (326) decides which section on the opposite lane is set as the overtaking path for the other vehicle (20-2) detected by the overtaking target vehicle detection unit (324) based on the travel permission section (81-2) being set (S1201) [...] At this time, an area inside intersections of perpendicular lines going down to the opposite lane from the two endpoint nodes and the opposite lane becomes an area on the opposite lane running parallel to the travel permission section of the overtaking target vehicle [specific example - provides nodes in which plurality of vehicles can enter node area].")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Aisu and Morita, et al. to include the teaching of Kanai, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of controlling multiple vehicles in a field space in order to minimize interference (Kanai, et al. Col. 1, lines 5-10).
Regarding claim 6, Aisu, Morita, et al., and Kanai, et al. remain as applied to claim 5, and in a further embodiment, teach: The management system according to claim 5, wherein the management device determines the travel route before departure of the plurality of moving objects (Aisu Col. 6, lines 47-51: "The route planner (109) generates a route plan designating passing order of a plurality of designated areas which each mobile object passes through on the basis of content of work to be done by each mobile object determined in advance and information regarding order of the work [determines travel route before departure of plurality of moving objects]").
Regarding claim 7, Aisu, Morita, et al., and Kanai, et al. remain as applied to claim 5, and in a further embodiment, teach: The management system according to claim 5, wherein each of the plurality of moving objects is an electric moving object, (Morita, et al. Col. 21, lines 17-24: "…plurality of vehicles are detected as other vehicles traveling in front of the self-vehicle, the forward-vehicle-information-based recommended speed arithmetic unit sets the current vehicle speeds of the plurality of vehicles traveling in front of the self-vehicle as recommended speeds of the self-vehicle at the respective positions of the plurality of vehicles traveling in front of the self-vehicle [plurality of moving objects - setting of speeds]." ; Morita, et al. Col. 23, lines 39-44: "…case in which the self-vehicle is an electric one, because the power generation (regeneration) caused by the motor is precisely controllable, it is preferable to reduce the recommended speed within as a wide speed range as possible in such a way that the self-vehicle can recover the regenerative power efficiently [electric moving object - specific example].")
and the drive device is configured to consume less energy as traveling speed becomes slower (Morita, et al. Col. 30, lines 63-67: "When receiving the above-mentioned request from the recommended speed presenting unit (8), the vehicle control device controls the engine power, the brake, or both of them to slow down the self-vehicle to a speed close to the recommended speed (step ST4h) [slow down traveling speed]." ; Morita, et al. Col. 29, lines 53-57: "Therefore, the recommended speed presentation device enables the driver to drive the self-vehicle with safety and with a small amount of energy consumption as long as the driver drives the self-vehicle according to this recommended speed [reduce energy consumption].").
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on September 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach the concept of the use of the fleet's latest ETA as the target. The examiner disagrees. In Aisu, the system defines the term of estimated arrival time as the “time […] at which each mobile object arrives at the designated area in the travel timing schedule of each mobile object” (Col. 12, lines 65-67). As a result, the methodology is used in which the latest estimated time of arrival is determined through the identification of the condition in which “a time point at which it is determined that the mobile object cannot arrive by the estimated arrival time or the mobile object will be delayed by equal to or longer than a threshold time length for the estimated arrival time” (Col. 13, lines 6-10). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Aisu with Morita, et al. because Morita, et al. teaches the process of reducing the energy consumption of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle’s speed and designated route (Col. 29, lines 48-57).
Applicant also asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach the concept of re-determining route across vehicles to meet that target with an explicit "no later than" constraint. The examiner disagrees. In Aisu, the travel route re-determination unit is defined as a replan determiner (108), which “…regenerates a travel timing schedule” (Col. 8, lines 35-38). As a result, the range of the expected arrival time is not later than the reference time is determined by ensuring that “…the mobile object operates in accordance with the travel plan before update (timing schedule before update) until the mobile object reaches the update position, and, after the mobile object reaches the update position, operates in accordance with the updated travel plan” (Col. 13, lines 36-44), and if the times need to be adjusted, for example, “…in a case where the mobile object which should precede will be late for the estimated arrival time even if the mobile object moves on the traveling path at maximum speed, it can be judged that delay by equal to or longer than a threshold time length is determined” (Col. 13, lines 26-31). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Aisu with Morita, et al. because Morita, et al. teaches the process of reducing the energy consumption of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle’s speed and designated route (Col. 29, lines 48-57).
Applicant also asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach the concept of an energy-minimization objective. The examiner disagrees. In Morita, et al., a speed presentation device has the ability to present a recommended speed, and, as a result, “enables the driver to drive the self-vehicle with safety and with a small amount of energy consumption as long as the driver drives the self-vehicle according to this recommended speed” (Col. 29, lines 48-57). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Morita, et al. with Aisu because Aisu teaches the process of redetermination for a plurality of moving objects under the condition in which if the expected arrival time is earlier than the reference time, the travel route is adjusted so that an expected arrival time of the second and subsequent moving objects to the destination approach the reference time (Col. 12, lines 17-27).
Applicant also asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach a two-ECU construction and signal content, such as a closed-loop, two-controller system which has particular sets of parameters that are redetermined and transmitted. The examiner disagrees. In Aisu, a unit in Fig. 25 illustrates the existence of a controller system within each mobile object within the larger overall system “…corresponding to the travel planning device (Col. 25, lines 25-27), such as a “…route planner (309)”, or second execution unit, or a “…route plan storage (302)”, or second storage unit (Col. 25, lines 27-29). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Aisu with Morita, et al. because Morita, et al. teaches the process of reducing the energy consumption of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle’s speed and designated route (Col. 29, lines 48-57).
Applicant also asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach a target stop position determination unit that determines a stop position at the destination. The examiner disagrees. In Aisu, the travel management device (200) conducts a process in which a command is transmitted “…which instructs each mobile object to depart from the designated area in which the mobile object waits”, and a secondary command is given which “…designates the designated area in which the mobile object should stop for waiting next, to each mobile object, on the basis of each piece of movement command data” (Col. 11, lines 25-32). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Aisu with Morita, et al. because Morita, et al. teaches the process of reducing the energy consumption of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle’s speed and designated route (Col. 29, lines 48-57).
Applicant also asserted that new claim 5 was patentable over Aisu, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11397442) in view of Morita, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8700299) because the references did not teach a travel permission area management unit which manages a travel-permitted area at node so two or more vehicles can pass without interfering, even in a setting without traffic lights. Please note that Kanai, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9804606) was cited in order to teach this feature. In Kanai, et al., the management control unit (320) helps to manage vehicle traffic at multiple nodes in order to avoid interference (Col. 7, lines 64-67) through the use of a travel permission section management unit (323) and an overtaking path generation unit (326) (Col. 8, lines 17-22). Specifically, “…the travel permission section management unit (323) decides a section length of the travel permission section based on the numbers of nodes and links included in the travel permission section” (Col. 9, lines 8-11) and the overtaking path generation unit (326) determines a node in which a plurality of vehicles can enter a node area through the process of “…decides which section on the opposite lane is set as the overtaking path for the other vehicle (20-2) detected by the overtaking target vehicle detection unit (324) based on the travel permission section (81-2) being set” (Col. 20, lines 2-20). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Kanai, et al. with Aisu and Morita, et al. because Aisu teaches the process of redetermination for a plurality of moving objects under the condition in which if the expected arrival time is earlier than the reference time, the travel route is adjusted so that an expected arrival time of the second and subsequent moving objects to the destination approach the reference time (Col. 12, lines 17-27) and Morita, et al. teaches the process of reducing the energy consumption of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle’s speed and designated route (Col. 29, lines 48-57).
Therefore, it can be concluded that since the combination of Aisu, Morita, et al., and Kanai, et al. reads on the claim limitations of the use of the fleet's latest ETA as the target and re-determining route across vehicles to meet that target with an explicit "no later than" constraint and an energy-minimization objective, a two-ECU construction and signal content, such as a closed-loop, two-controller system which has particular sets of parameters that are redetermined and transmitted, and a target stop position determination unit that determines a stop position at the destination and a travel permission area management unit which manages a travel-permitted area at node so two or more vehicles can pass without interfering, even in a setting without traffic lights, as in new claim 5, the arguments presented by the Applicant are not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakakibara, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 12196563) teaches an apparatus which contains a weight determiner which determines the weights of a plurality of travel paths in a network based on timings with respect to the movement of a first moving object and a route creator which creates a second route in which a second moving object travels in a network based on the weights of the plurality of the travel paths.
Applicant is considered to have implicit knowledge of the entire disclosure once a reference has been cited. Therefore, any previously cited figures, columns and lines should not be considered to limit the references in any way. The entire reference must be taken as a whole; accordingly, the Examiner contends that the art supports the rejection of the claims and the rejection is maintained.
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 TORRENCE S MARUNDA II whose telephone number is (571)272-5172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:30.
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, ANGELA Y ORTIZ can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/TORRENCE S MARUNDA II/ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663