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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed on 10/31/2025. Claims 1, 15 & 20 have been amended. No other claims have been amended, added, or canceled. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but 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
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 Wei-Quan (CN117109626 A) in view of Ayush et al (GeoDart: A system for discovering Maps Discrepancies).
As per claim 1, Wei-Quan discloses: a computer-implemented method for identifying and classifying route deviations, comprising:
receiving first-route data associated with a first route generated by a first routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties);
receiving second-route data associated with a second route generated by a second routing system, the first routing system and the second routing system being network-accessible services (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties);
generating an envelope that encloses the second-route data, the envelope being a representation of a geographical region having a border that encloses the second route and through which the second route runs (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes);
identifying a segment of the first route having first-route data points that lie outside the envelope, and identifying segment data associated with the segment (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes);
classifying a cause of a deviation associated with the segment based on the segment data, to provide a classification (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards); and
performing an action based on the classification, results of which are usable to improve performance of the first routing system and/or the second routing system by modifying the first routing system and/or the second routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards).
However, Wei-Quan does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the first routing system and the second routing system being two different network-accessible services; and wherein some of the first-route data lies inside the envelope of the first-route data lies outside the envelope.
Nevertheless, Bandil who is in the same field of endeavor discloses wherein the first routing system and the second routing system being two different network-accessible services (see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540; route generation); and wherein some of the first-route data lies inside the envelope of the first-route data lies outside the envelope (see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540; route generation, forced route generation, discrepancy validation process, RNA, RA and visual inspection module).
One of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the given invention would have been motivated to combine Bandil’s route generation and comparison system with those of Wei-Quan’s in order to form a more accurate and overall efficient mapping system (i.e., by improving road network graphs and/or developing more efficient routing algorithms—see Bandil at least Abstract and Introduction).
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 2: wherein the border defines a polygon that includes the second-route data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 3: further comprising submitting a same routing request to the first routing system and the second routing system, the routing request specifying a starting location and an ending location, and the first routing system using first routing logic to produce the first route between the starting location and the ending location based on first routing-system map data, and the second routing system using second routing logic to produce the second route between the starting location and the ending location based on second routing-system map data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 4: wherein the first routing logic is different than the second routing logic, and/or the first routing-system map data is different than the second routing-system map data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 2-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 5: wherein a first of the first-route data points that lie outside the envelope is preceded by a neighboring first-route data point that lies inside the envelope, and wherein the segment data includes the first-route data points outside the envelope and the neighboring first-route data point (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3, navigation lists two routes with different properties, overlapping routes with different classification standards and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 6: wherein the segment data points also include second-route data points of the second route associated with the divergence (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 7: wherein the classifying includes: determining that the segment encompasses a beginning or end of the first route and the second route; and in response to the determining, identifying a cause of the deviation as a difference in how the first and second routing systems associate route information with road network data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 8: wherein the segment is associated with a first path taken by the first route and a second path taken by the second route that is different than the first path, and wherein the classifying includes: determining that the first routing system is able to successfully take the second path; and in response to the determining, identifying a cause of the deviation as a permissible diversion taken by the first routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 9: wherein the segment is associated with a first path taken by the first route and a second path taken by the second route that is different than the first path, and wherein the classifying includes: in a first determining operation, determining that the first routing system is unable to successfully take the second path; in a second determining operation, determining that the second routing system is able to successfully take the first path; and in response to the first and second determining operations, identifying a cause of the deviation as non-navigability of the second path by the first routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 10: wherein the segment is associated with a first path taken by the first route and a second path taken by the second route that is different than the first path, and wherein the classifying includes: in a first determining operation, determining that the first routing system is unable to successfully take the second path; in a second determining operation, determining that the second routing system is unable to successfully take the first path; and in response to the first and second determining operations, identifying a cause of the deviation as a road modeling discrepancy between the first routing system and the second routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 11: wherein the action that is performed following classifying comprises: identifying another pair of routes, including a particular first route and a particular second route that are determined to follow a same path, with respect to a prescribed tolerance; determining a first estimated time of arrival of the first particular route and a second estimated time of arrival of the second particular route; and determining a difference between the first estimated time of arrival and the second estimated time of arrival, and comparing the difference to a threshold value (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 12: wherein the identifying another pair of routes includes: determining that the first particular route and the second particular route in their original respective states contained a deviation from each other; and modifying the first particular route so that it follows a path of the second particular route, to remove the deviation that has been determined, within the prescribed tolerance (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 13: further comprising repeating analysis for a case in which roles of the first route and the second route are reversed, including: generating a first-route envelope that encloses the first-route data, the first-route envelope being a representation of a geographical region having a border that encloses the first route and through which the first route runs; identifying a second-route segment of the second route having second-route data points that lie outside the first-route envelope, and identifying second-route segment data associated with the segment; and classifying a cause of a deviation associated with the second-route segment based on the second-route segment data, to provide a classification (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 14: further comprising identifying a modification to be made to the first routing system and/or the second routing system based on the classification, and making the modification to the first routing system and/or the second routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 15: A computing system for identifying and classifying route deviations, comprising: an instruction data store for storing computer-readable instructions; and a processing system for executing the computer-readable instructions in the data store, to perform operations including: receiving first-route data associated with a first route generated by a first routing system; receiving second-route data associated with a second route generated by a second routing system, the first routing system and the second routing system being two different network-accessible services; generating an envelope that encloses the second-route data, the envelope being a representation of a geographical region having a border that encloses the second route and through which the second route runs, wherein some of the first-route data lies inside the envelope and some of the first-route data lies outside the envelope; identifying a segment of the first route having first-route data points that lie outside the envelope, and identifying segment data associated with the segment; classifying a cause of a particular deviation associated with the segment based on the segment data, to provide a classification, the classification being selected from a class of deviations that includes: a deviation in associating route information with road network data; a deviation caused by a permissible route diversion taken by the first route; a deviation caused by a road segment that is non-navigable to the first routing system; and a route-modeling discrepancy between the first routing system and the second routing system that is manifested in the first route and the second route; and performing an action based on the classification, results of which are usable to improve performance of the first routing system and/or the second routing system by modifying the first routing system and/or the second routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3—see claim 1 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 16: wherein the operations further comprise: submitting a same routing request to the first routing system and the second routing system, the routing request specifying a starting location and an ending location, and the first routing system using first routing logic to produce the first route between the starting location and the ending location based on first routing-system map data, and the second routing system using second routing logic to produce the second route between the starting location and the ending location based on second routing-system map data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 17: wherein the first routing logic is different than the second routing logic, and/or the first routing-system map data is different than the second routing-system map data (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 18: wherein the operations further include repeating analysis for a case in which roles of the first route and the second route are reversed, including: generating a first-route envelope that encloses the first-route data; identifying a second-route segment of the second route having second-route data points that lie outside the first-route envelope, and identifying second-route segment data associated with the segment; and classifying a cause of a deviation associated with the second-route segment based on the second-route segment data, to provide a classification (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 19: wherein the operations further comprise identifying a modification to be made to the first routing system based on the classification, and making the modification to the first routing system (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
Both Wie-Quan and Bandil disclose claim 20: A computer-readable storage medium for storing computer-readable instructions, a processing system executing the computer-readable instructions to perform operations, the operations comprising: receiving first-route data associated with a first route generated by a first routing system; receiving second-route data associated with a second route generated by a second routing system, the first routing system and the second routing system being two different network-accessible services; generating an envelope that encloses the second-route data, the envelope being a representation of a geographical region having a border that encloses the second route and through which the second route runs, wherein some of the first-route data lie inside the envelope and some of the first-route data lies outside the envelope; identifying a segment of the first route having first-route data points that lie outside the envelope, and identifying segment data associated with the segment; classifying a cause of a deviation associated with the segment based on the segment data, to provide a classification; repeating the receiving first-route data, receiving second-route data, generating, identifying, and classifying for plural pairs of routes to identify a set of route pairs, each of which is determined to be free of deviations from each other within a prescribed tolerance, or modified to be free of deviations within the prescribed tolerance; and analyzing differences in times of arrival between each pair of routes in the set of route pairs (see Wei-Quan at least fig. 1-3 and see Bandil at least fig. 1-22, in particular fig. 1-2, 5-6, 8- 10 & 21-22 and pg.2538-2540).
Motivation to combine Wei-Quan and Bandil, in the instant claim, is the same as that in claim 1 above.
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 MACEEH ANWARI whose telephone number is 571-272-7591. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00 PM ES.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Ortiz can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MACEEH ANWARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights