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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-8, and 11-12, are pending.
Claims 1, and 11-12, are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 9 and 10 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 11, and 12 are independent claims.
Claims 1-8, and 11-12, will be examined.
This Non-Final Office action is in response to the “Applicant Arguments/Remarks,” and “Amended Claims” dated 06/05/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Remarks/Arguments and amended claims, filed 01/12/2026, with respect to claims 1-8, and 11-12, have been fully considered and Applicant' s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101, the amended claims and applicant’s response have been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 is withdrawn.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant' s Remarks/Arguments and amended claims, filed 06/05/2026 with respect to claims 1-8, and 11-12, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claims 1-8, and 11-12, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art reference(s) BEAUREPAIRE et al., US 20220063654, and previously disclosed prior art reference(s) SEKIGUCHI, KEISUK, UEYAMA, SUZUKI, CHEN, EDWARDS, and PU. The grounds for rejection in view of amended claims are provided below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, and 11-12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEKIGUCHI, US 20190162544, herein further known as Sekiguchi, in view of KEISUKE, JP 2012220447, herein further known as Keisuke, further in view of UEYAMA et al., WO 2013030974, herein further known as Ueyama, further in view of SUZUKI, US 20220017076, herein further known as Suzuki, further in view of BEAUREPAIRE et al., US 20220063654, herein further known as Beaurepaire.
Regarding claim 1, Sekiguchi discloses acquiring a path information on a path included in a road network set on a map data (¶¶ [0007-0010], route (i.e. path) information, route (i.e. path) in first/second map data) (¶¶ [0002], links and nodes constituting a road network, [0056], road network (node coordinates, link connection relations, or the like), see also FIG. 4), and generating a route that a vehicle is scheduled to travel in correspondence with the road network based on the path information stored in a database (¶¶ [0036-0038], [0045], generates a route along which the vehicle 100 needs to travel using the map data), acquiring a path type (¶¶ [0005-0009], different branch points) indicating whether a target path on which the vehicle is traveling among the path at a timing acquired is a first path (¶ [0056], road between a node (28, 64) and a node (131, 73) is constituted by four links 1101, 1102, 1103 and 1104, and 2101, 2102, 2103, 2104, and 2105) or a second path bifurcating from the first path (¶ [0056], a road branching from the above-described road, see FIG. 4, 1105, 1106, 2106, 2107), included in the road network (¶¶ [0002], links and nodes constituting a road network, [0056], road network (node coordinates, link connection relations, or the like), see also FIG. 4), determining whether or not there is a target bifurcation to the second path ahead along a traveling direction of the vehicle (¶¶ [0127], see also FIG. 6), if it is determined that the target path is the first path based on the path type (¶¶ [0062], [0162], result 530 is converted into the route information 560, correct route) and transmitting the generated driving route to a controller that autonomously controls traveling of the vehicle (¶¶ [0036-0040]) autonomously controlling, by the controller, traveling of the vehicle along the generated driving route based on the path information stored in the database (¶¶ [0036-0040], [0050-0051], [0062]).
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state acquiring a reroute request indicating an instruction to regenerate the route and deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle by a predetermined distance or more from the point, if there is the target bifurcation; generating a driving route for the vehicle on map data having higher accuracy than the map data based on the path information stored in the database, and interruption of the autonomous controlling of the vehicle is suppressed during regeneration of the route in response to the reroute request.
Keisuke teaches acquiring a reroute request indicating an instruction to regenerate the route (¶¶ [0077], determine the route information is "re-route timing" (step SA4: Yes)… a re-search request, (step SA5), and deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle, if there is the target bifurcation (¶¶ [0085-0089], specifies a branch point (i.e. target bifurcation), remove (discard) the re-search path… deleted (discarded) from the path information file, ¶ [0086], predetermined position around the branch point, (i.e. predetermined distance or more from the point), see also FIG. 5-7).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the acquiring a reroute request indicating an instruction to regenerate the route and deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle if there is the target bifurcation as taught by Keisuke.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Keisuke for the reasons stated in Keisuke, a more robust method and system identifies a spot branching between the route output on the output part and the searched re-search route transmitted from the navigation server, and causes the output part to output the searched re-search route if a predetermined output condition related to the identified branching spot is satisfied and is capable of notifying a re-search route at an appropriate timing without confusing a user.
Furthermore, Ueyama teaches a predetermined distance or more from the point of the target bifurcation (page 13, paragraph 2, position Q3…, see also FIG. 29, and claim 15).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the predetermined distance or more from the point of the target bifurcation as taught by Ueyama.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Ueyama for the reasons stated in Ueyama , a more robust method and system which avoids occupant feeling a sense of incongruity, anxiety, or discomfort where there is a branch road ahead of the vehicle, the occupant is concerned about whether the vehicle will travel with or without changing the direction of travel so that the vehicle will select the desired travel path and pass through the branch road.
Furthermore, Suzuki teaches generating a driving route for the vehicle on map data having higher accuracy than the map data based on the path information stored in the database (¶¶ [0040-0042], highly accurate map information).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the generating a driving route for the vehicle on map data having higher accuracy than the map data based on the path information stored in the database as taught by Suzuki.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Suzuki for the reasons stated in Suzuki paragraph [0011], more robust method and system producing a navigation route to a place allowing safe stopping/parking, by using the highly accurate map information.
Furthermore, Beaurepaire teaches interruption of the autonomous controlling of the vehicle is suppressed during regeneration of the route in response to the reroute request (¶¶ [0111], stores data (e.g., map data, route data, etc.) generated and/or employed by the processing circuitry [0176], wherein identifying and leveraging parameters of autonomous transition regions using historical mobility patterns and actions to be performed by an autonomous vehicle along a route may be identified in a more efficient manner).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Sekiguchi the interruption of the autonomous controlling of the vehicle is suppressed during regeneration of the route in response to the reroute request as taught by Beaurepaire.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Beaurepaire for the reasons stated in Beaurepaire paragraph [0176], more robust methods and systems to reduced network load and an overall improved passenger experience.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state determining whether or not there is a target bifurcation to the second path ahead along the traveling direction of the vehicle, if it is determined that the target path is the first path based on the path, and not deleting the path information stored in the database, if there is not the target bifurcation.
Keisuke teaches determining whether or not there is a target bifurcation to the second path ahead along the traveling direction of the vehicle, if it is determined that the target path is the first path based on the path, and not deleting the path information stored in the database, if there is not the target bifurcation (¶¶ [0084-0086], see also FIG. 4, ¶ [0092] see also FIG. 12-13, wherein the guidance route remains, and there is no bifurcation).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the determining whether or not there is a target bifurcation to the second path ahead along the traveling direction of the vehicle, if it is determined that the target path is the first path based on the path type, and not deleting the path information stored in the database, if there is not the target bifurcation as taught by Keisuke.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Keisuke for the reasons stated in Keisuke, a more robust method and system identifies a spot branching between the route output on the output part and the searched re-search route transmitted from the navigation server, and causes the output part to output the searched re-search route if a predetermined output condition related to the identified branching spot is satisfied and is capable of notifying a re-search route at an appropriate timing without confusing a user.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle by a predetermined distance or more from the point where the second path bifurcates from the first path, if it is determined that the target path is the second path based on the path type.
Keisuke teaches deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle by the second path bifurcates from the first path, if it is determined that the target path is the second path based on the path (¶ [0085], apparatus 100 can delete (discard) unnecessary path information, see also FIG. 6-7).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the deleting the path information stored in the database regarding the first path or the second path at a point spaced forward along the traveling direction of the vehicle by a predetermined distance or more from the point where the second path bifurcates from the first path, if it is determined that the target path is the second path based on the path type as taught by Keisuke.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Keisuke for the reasons stated in Keisuke, a more robust method and system identifies a spot branching between the route output on the output part and the searched re-search route transmitted from the navigation server, and causes the output part to output the searched re-search route if a predetermined output condition related to the identified branching spot is satisfied and is capable of notifying a re-search route at an appropriate timing without confusing a user.
Furthermore, Ueyama teaches a predetermined distance or more from the point of the target bifurcation (page 13, paragraph 2, position Q3…, see also FIG. 29, and claim 15).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the predetermined distance or more from the point of the target bifurcation as taught by Ueyama.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Ueyama for the reasons stated in Ueyama , a more robust method and system which avoids occupant feeling a sense of incongruity, anxiety, or discomfort where there is a branch road ahead of the vehicle, the occupant is concerned about whether the vehicle will travel with or without changing the direction of travel so that the vehicle will select the desired travel path and pass through the branch road.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state setting the predetermined distance larger as a traveling speed of the vehicle is greater.
Ueyama teaches setting the predetermined distance larger as a traveling speed of the vehicle is greater (page 6, In step 230… reference distance Lf is calculated to be larger as the vehicle speed V is higher).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the setting the predetermined distance larger as a traveling speed of the vehicle is greater as taught by Ueyama.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Ueyama for the reasons stated in Ueyama , a more robust method and system which avoids occupant feeling a sense of incongruity, anxiety, or discomfort where there is a branch road ahead of the vehicle, the occupant is concerned about whether the vehicle will travel with or without changing the direction of travel so that the vehicle will select the desired travel path and pass through the branch road.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
Sekiguchi discloses further the road network ¶¶ [0002], links and nodes constituting a road network, [0056], road network (node coordinates, link connection relations, or the like), see also FIG. 4) is set by a navigation device, and the path information is transmitted by the navigation device (¶ [0038]).
Regarding claim 11, all limitations have been examined with respect to the methods in claim 1. The device taught/disclosed in claim 11 can clearly perform the methods of claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, all limitations have been examined with respect to the methods in claim 1. The storage medium and computer devices taught/disclosed in claim 12 can clearly perform the methods of claim 1. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire, in view of CHEN et al., US 20190020573, herein further known as Chen.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state if it is determined that the target path does not correspond to either the first path or the second path based on the path type, deleting all the path information stored in the database.
Chen teaches if it is determined that the target path does not correspond to either the first path or the second path based on the path type, deleting all the path information stored in the database (¶ [0038], adding new paths would result in the new paths being discarded and all paths being marked as inactive).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi if it is determined that the target path does not correspond to either the first path or the second path based on the path type, deleting all the path information stored in the database as taught by Chen.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Chen for the reasons stated in Chen paragraph [0001], a more robust method and system wherein shortest path problems will not be computationally expensive.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire, in view of EDWARDS et al., US 20200080851, herein further known as Edwards.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state the first path is longer than the second path.
Edwards teaches the first path is longer than the second path (¶ [0044], first route 110 may be longer than the second route 112).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the first path is longer than the second path as taught by Edwards.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Edwards for the reasons stated in Edwards paragraph [0002], more robust method and system to control machines using characteristics which thereby improving safety.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire, in view of PU, US 20170225687, herein further known as Pu.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sekiguchi, Keisuke, Ueyama, Suzuki, and Beaurepaire disclose/teach all limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Sekiguchi does not explicitly state the path information is acquired by communication based on a protocol defined in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Interface Specifications (ADASIS).
Pu teaches the path information is acquired by communication based on a protocol defined in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Interface Specifications (ADASIS) (¶¶ [0005], and [0054]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Sekiguchi the path information is acquired by communication based on a protocol defined in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Interface Specifications (ADASIS) as taught by Pu.
One would be motivated to modify Sekiguchi in view of Pu for the reasons stated in Pu paragraph [0004], more robust method and system which allows comfortable, anticipatory, energy-saving, possibly timesaving, but particularly safe driving in any case.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM EST.
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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights