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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 25-27,31-32,35,37 and 39-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 2020/0011693) in view of Galan-Oliveras (US 2019/0049259).
Claims 28-30, 33-34, 36, and 38 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.
Priority
The priority date for this application is 12/27/2021.
Response to Arguments
The applicant has argued that Yoo does not disclose the amended claims of the independent claims. These arguments are moot, however, as a new grounds of rejection has been identified in a renewed search necessitated by said amendments.
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.
Claims 25-27,31-32,35,37 and 39-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 2020/0011693) in view of Galan-Oliveras (US 2019/0049259). These references are analogous as both references relate to autonomous vehicle control.
As per Claim 25:
Yoo discloses the following limitations:
“A drive assist formulation apparatus, comprising: a processor to execute a program, and a memory to store the program which, when executed by the processor, performs processes of, acquiring at least one piece of normal-accuracy node information including normal- accuracy positional information indicating a normal-accuracy position of a normal-accuracy node in a travel route of a subject vehicle calculated using a normal-accuracy map including road shape information and the normal-accuracy node per unit road; acquiring a high-accuracy map including road shape information, a high-accuracy node, and a high-accuracy link per unit traffic lane; determining whether or not the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high- accuracy node or the high-accuracy link based on the normal-accuracy node information which has been acquired…; determining whether or not the subject vehicle travels a high-accuracy map road included in the high-accuracy map based on a determination result of the determination whether or not the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link; and formulating a drive assist of the subject vehicle using the high-accuracy map when it is determined that the subject vehicle travels the high-accuracy map road.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses identifying whether a current position of a vehicle corresponds to a route for which high-definition map information is available and, if it is, then assistance is rendered via said high-definition map data.
Yoo does not disclose the following limitations that Galan-Oliveras teaches.
“and association information indicating a correspondence relationship between the normal-accuracy map and the high-accuracy map”
Galan-Oliveras Table 1 teaches separate road segments that are representative of normal map information (See Figure 5) correlated to high-definition map data associated with the locations of the regular map data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the system disclosed by Yoo with the table of correlated data taught by Galan-Oliveras. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to make the system more effective by utilizing known methods of data organization.
With regards to Claim 26, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 25 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the association information includes association positional information indicating a position corresponding to a position of the high-accuracy node which is specific or the high- accuracy link which is specific and association reference information which is information for referring to the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link included in the high-accuracy map based on the association positional information”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 27, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 26 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the association positional information includes information indicating a predetermined area including a position corresponding to a position of the high-accuracy node which is specific or a position of the high-accuracy link which is specific.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map. Such positions are predetermined insofar as the association between locations on a standard map and high-definition map are correlated ahead of time.
With regards to Claim 31, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 26 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the normal-accuracy node information includes a normal-accuracy link attribute indicating an attribute of a normal-accuracy link entering or exiting from the normal-accuracy node, the association information includes an association link attribute indicating an attribute of the high-accuracy link entering or exiting from the high-accuracy node, and the determination whether or not the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link includes a determination whether or not the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link based on a third association determination determining whether or not the normal-accuracy positional information and the association positional information are associated with each other and a fourth association determination determining whether or not the normal-accuracy link attribute and the association link attribute are associated with each other.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map. Position information is continuous in these maps and therefore consistent entering and exiting any corresponding points on a map.
With regards to Claim 32, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 31 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the normal-accuracy link attribute includes an attribute of the normal-accuracy link entering or exiting from the normal-accuracy node corresponding to a junction or a branch point of a road, and the association link attribute includes an attribute of the high-accuracy link entering or exiting from the high-accuracy node corresponding to a junction or a branch point of a road.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map. Position information is continuous in these maps and therefore consistent entering and exiting any corresponding points on a map.
With regards to Claim 35, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 26 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the association positional information is included as an attribute of the high-accuracy node or an attribute of the high-accuracy link corresponding to the normal-accuracy position of the normal-accuracy node.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 37, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 31 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the association positional information and the association link attribute are included as an attribute of the high-accuracy node or an attribute of the high-accuracy link corresponding to the normal-accuracy position of the normal-accuracy node.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 39, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 25 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the formulation of the drive assist includes a formulation of a travel route per unit traffic lane which the subject vehicle travels using the high-accuracy map including the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link associated with the normal-accuracy position.”
Yoo Paragraph [0041] discloses drive assist which includes autonomous driving necessitating formulation of a travel path.
With regards to Claim 40, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 25 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the acquisition of the at least one piece of normal-accuracy node information includes acquiring the plural pieces of normal-accuracy node information satisfying a predetermined condition, and the determination whether or not the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link includes a determination whether or not each the normal-accuracy position is associated with the high-accuracy node or the high-accuracy link based on each piece of the normal-accuracy node information and the association information.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 41, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 25 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein the normal-accuracy node includes at least one entry node connected to a normal- accuracy link entering another road and at least one exit node connected to a normal-accuracy link exiting from another road.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 42, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 41 and further discloses the following limitations:
“wherein when a positional relationship between one of the entry nodes or one of the exit nodes and the another one of the entry nodes or the another one of the exit nodes adjacent to the one of the entry nodes or the one of the exit nodes satisfies a predetermined condition, the normal- accuracy node information includes information regarding an intermediate node set between the one of the entry nodes or the one of the exit nodes and the another one of the entry nodes or the another one of the exit nodes.”
Yoo Paragraphs [0038]-[0041] discloses associating positions with positions within a high-definition map.
With regards to Claim 43, Yoo in view of Galan-Oliveras discloses all of the limitations of Claim 25 and further discloses the following limitations:
“further comprising positioning a position of the subject vehicle per unit traffic lane, wherein the formulation of the drive assist includes a formulation of a drive assist of the subject vehicle based on a position of the subject vehicle positioned per unit traffic lane.”
Yoo Paragraph [0041] discloses drive assist including lane positioning.
As per Claim 44: this claim is substantially similar to Claim 25 and is therefore rejected using the same references and rationale.
Claim Objections
Claims 28-30, 33-34, 36, and 38 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.
These claims either contain or are dependent on a claim that contains a limitation in which the correlation between the normal-accuracy location and high-accuracy location is dependent on the normal-accuracy azimuth information entering and exiting nodes. This feature is neither disclosed or made obvious by the most closely related prior art, Yoo (US 2020/0011693) and Galan-Oliveras (US 2019/0049259) and Wheeler (US 2019/0266179) and Moustafa (US 2019/0228648). Nowhere else in the prior art is this deficiency rectified.
Related References
Wheeler (US2019/0266179)
Related to route storage management for high definition maps.
Moustafa (US 2019/0228648)
Related to managing high-definition map data for autonomous vehicles.
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 Examiner Godfrey Maciorowski, whose telephone number is (571) 272-4652. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 examiner by telephone are unsuccessful the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Worden can be reached on (571) 272-4876. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/GODFREY ALEKSANDER MACIOROWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/JASON HOLLOWAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights