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 . Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 and 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2022/0234581 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a method for avoiding a collision of a vehicle (Abstract), the method comprising:
acquiring, when an ego vehicle turns, movement prediction path information for a side surface of the ego vehicle; acquiring surrounding object information for a surrounding object positioned near the ego vehicle; determining a collision risk between the ego vehicle and the surrounding object based on the movement prediction path information and the surrounding object information ([0039] – [0040]);
and actuating a braking device of the ego vehicle when it is determined that there is the collision risk between the ego vehicle and the surrounding object ([0044]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the method of claim 1, as stated above, wherein the acquiring of the movement prediction path information is made by predicting a movement radius of the ego vehicle based on a sensor signal of the ego vehicle, and acquiring the movement prediction path information for each of a left surface and a right surface of the ego vehicle by using specification information of the ego vehicle based on the movement radius ([0049] and [0052]).
Regarding claims 3-4, Kim discloses the method of claim 2, as stated above, wherein the acquiring of the surrounding object information is made by acquiring the surrounding object information through a front detection sensor and a side detection sensor mounted on the ego vehicle; and wherein the acquiring of the surrounding object information is made by identifying a road boundary structure which is the surrounding object by using the front detection sensor and the side detection sensor, and acquiring the surrounding object information including a location and a height for the identified road boundary structure ([0036] – [0038]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the method of claim 3, as stated above, wherein the acquiring of the surrounding object information is made by identifying the other vehicle or a person which is the surrounding object by using the front detection sensor and the side detection sensor, and acquiring the surrounding object information including a future movement path of the other vehicle or the person which is identified ([0040]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the method of claim 2, as stated above, wherein the determining of the collision risk is made by determining whether there is a risk that the ego vehicle will collide with the surrounding object in the future by using the surrounding object information for the surrounding object closest to the ego vehicle based on the movement prediction path information for each of a left surface and a right surface of the ego vehicle ([0050]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses the method of claim 6, as stated above, wherein the determining of the collision risk is made by determining, when the surrounding object closest to the ego vehicle is positioned at a left side of the ego vehicle, whether there is the risk that the ego vehicle will collide with the surrounding object in the future based on the movement prediction path information and the surrounding object information for the left surface of the ego vehicle, and determining, when the surrounding object closest to the ego vehicle is positioned at a right side of the ego vehicle, whether there is the risk that the ego vehicle will collide with the surrounding object in the future based on the movement prediction path information and the surrounding object information for the right surface of the ego vehicle ([0036]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses the method of claim 1, as stated above, wherein the actuating of the braking device is made by additionally actuating a rear wheel steering device of the ego vehicle when it is determined that there is the collision risk between the ego vehicle and the surrounding object ([0064]).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the method of claim 10, as stated above, wherein the actuating of the braking device is made by actuating the rear wheel steering device so that a rear wheel direction of the ego vehicle is opposite to a front wheel direction of the ego vehicle ([0070] – [0076]).
Regarding claims 12-18, the elements contained in claims 12-18 are substantially similar to elements presented in claims 1-7, respectively, except that it set forth the claimed invention as an apparatus rather than a method and are rejected for the same reasons as applied above.
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 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Park (KR 20160141285 A).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses the method of claim 1, as stated above, except for “wherein the acquiring of the surrounding object information is achieved by storing the surrounding object information corresponding to a time when a start of the ego vehicle is turned off when the start of the ego vehicle is turned off, and acquiring, when the ego vehicle is restarted, the surrounding object information by loading the stored surrounding object information without separately performing an operation of acquiring the surrounding object information for the surrounding object positioned near the ego vehicle”.
Park teaches claimed subject matter (Abstract). Park teaches that “The controller is characterized in that it receives the distance to an obstacle measured by a distance measuring unit before the vehicle’s engine is turned off, determines whether the distance reaches a pre-stored collision risk distance, and stores the determined distance, and controls the transmission control unit to shift to P gear depending on whether the pre-stored distance to the obstacle reaches the collision risk distance when a signal according to vehicle behavior is input from the movement detection unit after the vehicle’s engine is turned off” ([0021]). Furthermore, Park teaches that “According to Fig. 3, the controller is turned off when the vehicle ignition is off, and can be turned on when a signal according to the vehicle movement is input from the movement detection unit. The controller enters a sleep mode in which operation is turned off together with the vehicle when the vehicle is stopped and the engine is turned off. At this time, the vehicle is parked, but the gear is set to N so that it can move when an external force is applied. In this sleep mode state, when a signal according to vehicle movement is input from the movement detection unit, even if the ignition is not turned on, the controller is turned on to control the gear to be shifted to a specific gear according to the information input from the distance measurement unit. In this way, when the vehicle moves and the signal from the movement detection unit is transmitted and the operation of the controller is turned on, distance information from surrounding obstacles is input from the distance measurement unit, and this is compared with the pre-stored collision risk distance to determine the distance. At this time, if the distance between the vehicle and surrounding obstacles is within the pre-stored collision risk distance, the controller transmits a command signal to the transmission control unit so that the transmission gear is shifted to P gear” ([0043] – [0045]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the surrounding object information disclosed by Kim to include a controller configured to ensure that, when the engine ignition is turned ON or OFF and a signal is received from the movement detection unit as taught by Park, the transmission control unit is properly controlled to shift the gear to the P position and prevent collision with obstacles.
Regarding claim 20, the elements contained in claim 20 are substantially similar to elements presented in claim 9, except that it set forth the claimed invention as an apparatus rather than a method and is rejected for the same reasons as applied above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See attached form PTO-892.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Luke Huynh whose telephone number is 571-270-5746. The examiner can normally be reached Mon 8-5, Tues 8-12, Thurs & Fri 8-2.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LUKE HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
02/05/2026