DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/07/2024 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 § 101
Claims 1-11 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims are either directed to a method or an apparatus, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES) The examiner has identified claim 1, which substantially includes all the limitations of claim 19, as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis. The independent claim 1 recites the following limitations (bolded text corresponds to the abstract idea):
A vehicle control system comprising:
an image signal processor (ISP) configured to receive first image data, the first image data defining a first image of an object around a vehicle during a first frame interval, and to process the first image data to generate second image data defining a second image;
a first neural processing unit (NPU) configured to receive the second image data from the ISP, to perform a first image segmentation on the second image data to identify a type of the object, and to generate first numerical data about a numerical value of a region occupied by the object within the second image;
a second NPU configured to receive the second image data from the ISP, to perform a second image segmentation on the second image data to identify the type of the object, and generate second numerical data about the numerical value of the region occupied by the object within the second image; and
a data processing circuit configured to: receive each of the first numerical data and the second numerical data from the first NPU and the second NPU;
receive sensing data about a driving state of the vehicle during the first frame interval from a sensing system;
process the first numerical data, the second numerical data, and the sensing data to indicate an abnormality state of each of the first NPU and the second NPU;
compare an amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval and an amount of change in the second numerical data during the first frame interval; and
generate a correlation between an amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval and an amount of change in the sensing data during the first frame interval based on identifying that the amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval is equal to the amount of change in the second numerical data during the first frame interval.
Under its broadest reasonable interpretations, this system is generating a correlation between an amount of change in data. If the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim limitations entails performance in the human mind, then it falls within the mental processes grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: Yes. The claims are abstract.)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.f), (2) Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05.g), (3) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05.h).
In particular, the claims recite additional elements of receiving first image data and receiving second image data. The steps of receiving first image data and receiving second image data are recited at a high level of generality and do not comprise any of the above additional elements that individually or in combination, have integrated the judicial exception into a practical application. Specifically, the steps of receiving first image data and receiving second image data constitute mere data gathering and is insignificant extra-solution activity. There are no additional elements that apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. (Step 2A-Prong 2: No. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application.)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an "inventive concept") to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements claimed amount to insignificant extra-solution activities. See 2106.05(g) for more details. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, cannot provide an inventive concept-rendering the claim patent ineligible. Thus claim 1 and similarly other independent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
The dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for at least the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the aforementioned claims are not patent-eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-18 are allowed. The prior art Korchev (US20200168010) discloses a fault detection system including one or more sensors onboard a vehicle to detect a characteristic of the vehicle and generate sensor signals corresponding to the characteristic . However, the prior art does not explicitly disclose a data processing circuit configured to: receive each of the first numerical data and the second numerical data from the first NPU and the second NPU; receive sensing data about a driving state of the vehicle during the first frame interval from a sensing system; process the first numerical data, the second numerical data, and the sensing data to indicate an abnormality state of each of the first NPU and the second NPU; compare an amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval and an amount of change in the second numerical data during the first frame interval; and generate a correlation between an amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval and an amount of change in the sensing data during the first frame interval based on identifying that the amount of change in the first numerical data during the first frame interval is equal to the amount of change in the second numerical data during the first frame interval.
Claims 1-11 and 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office Action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT FENG whose telephone number is (703)756-4715. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, NAVID MEHDIZADEH can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/VINCENT FENG/Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/TODD MELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669