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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed December 11, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-8 and 10-18 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued:
Claim 1 is amended to include the features of dependent claim 9, which is
rejected for obviousness in view of the combination of Roy, Lai, and Schumann. This combination, however, does not disclose or suggest:
determining...a second parking place different from the original
parking place of the vehicle depending on at least one spacing
between a first axle and a second axle of the vehicle such that a
position of the second axle on the second parking place of the vehicle is
not same as a position of the first axle on the original parking place of the
vehicle
commanding the driving control unit of the vehicle to occupy the
second parking place of the vehicle after a predetermined period of time after occupying the original parking place ... the predetermined period of
time at least depending on the determined air temperature or the
temperature of the ground
The combination of Roy, Lai, and Schumann does not disclose or suggest at least those features of independent claim 1 discussed above.
In this office action, Lai is cited as the main reference. Reasoning is provided that “a second parking place different from the original parking place of the vehicle depending on at least one spacing between a first axle and a second axle of the vehicle such that a position of the second axle on the second parking place of the vehicle is not same as a position of the first axle on the original parking place of the vehicle” is implied from inherent structure of a vehicle in order not to contact the same tire contact spot of the original parking after re-parking.
Schumann is cited to teach the determining air temperature and predetermined time to avoid hollow ice forming.
Roy is cited to teach the vehicle is a lorry.
The teachings of Schumann and Roy are combined with Lai to teach the claimed invention of the amended independent claims.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20200317188 A1) in view of Schumann et al. (US 20210048527 A1) and Roy et al. (US 20230256972 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lai discloses: A system for a vehicle equipped with a driving control unit configured to automatically control the vehicle, wherein the system is configured to {paragraph [0005]: autonomous vehicle}: determine a danger of an icy hollow forming below tires of the vehicle parked at an original parking place or yet to be parked at an original parking place on a ground by detecting ice or snow on the ground {abstract: in response to initiating auto - parking of the vehicle , defining a set of thresholds according to at least environmental characteristics of a surrounding environment of the vehicle. [0036]: the monitoring module 220 produces the environmental characteristics to indicate, in one aspect, road conditions such as icy, snow-covered}.
Lai does not disclose: by determining an air temperature or a temperature of the ground.
Schumann teaches determining air temperature in paragraph [0026]: If the ambient temperature is furthermore at or below the freezing point for a predefined minimal time interval, it is then possible to infer a deep snow cover with tire tracks.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the air temperature determining feature of Schumann with the described invention of Lai in order to consider air temperature as a factor for determining a danger of an icy hollow forming.
Lai further discloses: determining, responsive to determining there is the danger of the icy hollow forming, a second parking place different from the original parking place of the vehicle depending on at least one spacing between a first axle and a second axle of the vehicle such that a position of the second axle on the second parking place of the vehicle is not same as a position of the first axle on the original parking place of the vehicle; and commanding the driving control unit of the vehicle to occupy the second parking place of the vehicle after a predetermined period of time after occupying the original parking place {Lai discloses determining there is the danger of the icy hollow forming in the abstract: A set of thresholds is defined according to an environmental characteristics of a surrounding environment of a vehicle, and paragraph [0047]: environmental characteristics such as road condition… the road is slippery from ice. Lai discloses automatic parking considering environmental factors in [0019]: The parking system can define the set of thresholds dynamically by adapting values for operating characteristics of the vehicle as a function of environmental characteristics of the surrounding environment in which the vehicle is operating. Lai discloses determining a second parking place different from an original parking place of the vehicle and commanding the driving control unit of the vehicle to occupy the second parking place of the vehicle in [0047]: to pull out of the parking space and re-park according to the clearance defined by an associated threshold.
Re-parking means that the tires of the vehicle do not occupy the same position to avoid icy spots on a parking lot. Examine notes that the first and second axles are inherent in a vehicle. Tires are attached to the axles and contact the ground. In order to re-park to avoid icy spots on a parking lot, it is required for the tires not to contact the same spots of the original parking after re-parking. Depending on spacing between a first axle and a second axle of the vehicle such that a position of the second axle on the second parking place of the vehicle is not same as a position of the first axle on the original parking place of the vehicle is one way of such re-parking. Also a predetermined time is required to consider environmental thresholds and to determine need of re-parking.
Schumann teaches: wherein the system is configured to determine the predetermined period of time at least depending on the determined air temperature or the temperature of the ground {[0026]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the predetermined time feature of Schumann with the described invention of Lai in order to consider a time period under freezing air temperature as a factor for determining a danger of an icy hollow forming.
Modified Lai does not disclose: wherein the vehicle is a lorry.
Roy teaches that the vehicle is a lorry in [0064]: tractor-trailer, semi-trailer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the lorry as a vehicle type feature of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to apply the re-parking feature to a heavy vehicle such as a lorry, for which the hollow icy forming has a severe impact.
Similar reasoning applies to claims 10, 11.
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1, Roy teaches: wherein the system is further configured to: recognize the danger of the icy hollow forming only when a temporal length of a previous journey of the vehicle exceeds a predetermined first threshold value or when a current tire temperature determined by a tire temperature sensor unit of the system exceeds a predetermined second threshold value when occupying the original parking place {[0122]: the surface temperature of the tire… how much of it is coated with snow and ice}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the tire temperature feature of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to facilitate determining icy hollow forming.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 12.
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1, Roy teaches: wherein the system is configured to: recognize the danger of the icy hollow forming only when the air temperature or the temperature of the ground is below a predetermined third threshold value {[0022]: air temperature sensor to determine an exterior ambient air temperature and a surface temperature sensor to determine a surface temperature of the snow-covered roadway}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the air and ground temperature feature of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to facilitate determining icy hollow forming.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 13.
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 1, Roy teaches: wherein the system is configured to: determine the second parking place depending on at least one spacing of two driven axles of the vehicle such that the position of the second driven axle on the second parking place of the vehicle is not same as the position of the first driven axle on the original parking place of the vehicle {Roy discloses tractor-trailer, semi-trailer in [0064]. It is known that tractor-trailer, semi-trailer may have two driven axles}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the two driven axles feature of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to facilitate determining re-park positions for heavy trucks.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 14.
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1, Roy teaches: wherein the system is configured to: determine the second parking place depending on respective paired spacing of all axles of the vehicle taken into account for a potential overlap of positions of tires belonging to the axles on the ground between the original and second parking place {[0064]. It is known that tractor-trailer, semi-trailer may have paired spacing of axles }.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the paired spacing of axles feature of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to facilitate determining re-park positions for heavy trucks.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 15.
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 1, Roy teaches: wherein the system has a camera configured to record the ground in surroundings of the vehicle, and the system is configured to perform image recognition based on data of the camera and to recognize ice or snow on the ground {[0011]: a road camera that captures images of a road that is at least partially covered with snow. The images are processed by the processor to determine the slipperiness of the road. This may be done by classifying images or extracting features of the images indicative of snow depth and snow type}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the camera of Roy with the described invention of modified Lai in order to facilitate determining icy hollow forming.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 16.
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 1, Lai discloses: wherein the system is configured to predetermine the original parking place in such a way that there is sufficient shunting length in front of the vehicle to be able to occupy the determined second parking place of the vehicle {[0047]: to adjust a clearance between the vehicle 100 and a defined boundary. The defined boundary may be a marker for a parking space, a lane, an entry into a parking facility… re-park according to the clearance defined by an associated threshold}.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 18.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Schumann and Roy and in further view of Chowdhury et al. (US 20190376811 A1).
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 1, modified Lai does not teach: wherein the system is configured to recognize the danger of the icy hollow forming based on a heuristic correlation, which comprises at least one air temperature or a temperature of the ground and has a probability of the danger of the icy hollow forming as the starting value, wherein the danger of the icy hollow forming is recognized when the probability exceeds a predetermined fourth threshold value.
Chowdhury teaches ice forming probability based on correlation with air temperature in paragraph [0003]: freezing temperature… ice formation for road segments has been predicted using joint predictive probability distributions for temperature and precipitation, presenting statistical correlations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ice formation probability feature of Chowdhury with the described invention of modified Lai in order to evaluate factors for ice formation danger.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 17.
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 CHANMIN PARK whose telephone number is (408)918-7555. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571)272-6011. 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.
/C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/RUSSELL FREJD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661