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 CLAIMS
This action is in response to the Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 4/02/2026. Claims 11-20 are pending and are examined below.
FINALITY
Applicant’s request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office Action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS AND ARGUMENTS
In regards to the claim rejections under § 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 4/02/2026 have been fully 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 U.S.C. § 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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 15-18 is/are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Sekine (JP2002362183A) in view of Natsumi (US20200331498A1; “Natsumi”).
As to claim 1, Sekine discloses a method for the automated longitudinal guidance of a motor vehicle, the method comprising:
detecting that two turns lie in an upcoming route section (“The curve recognition unit 14 includes a continuous curve determination unit 21, which determines whether the detected curve is … a continuous curve consisting of multiple curves in sequence.” ¶ 16.); and
in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through and after passing through a first of the two turns (“In step S05, the vehicle's current speed VP is set as the second set speed V2.
Then, in step S06, constant speed control is performed at the second set speed V2. This allows the vehicle to properly navigate curves recognized by the curve recognition unit 14. Next, in step S07, it is determined whether or not the vehicle has passed the exit point of the curve. If the result of this determination is "NO", return to step S06. On the other hand, if the result of this determination is "YES", the process proceeds to step S08.” ¶ 32. “In step S08, the next curve and the previous curve, that is, the curve in front of the vehicle and the curve that has been passed, are determined by the curve recognition unit 14's continuous curve determination unit 21 to be continuous curves or not. If the result of this determination is "YES", proceed to step S09 and continue constant speed control at the second set speed V2.” ¶ 33. See also ¶¶ 35 and 43.).
Sekine fails to explicitly disclose: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through and after passing through a first of the two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns.
Nevertheless, Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns (“After causing vehicle 1 to accelerate to the target velocity, travel control section A maintains the velocity at the target velocity until vehicle 1 enters the second curved path.” ¶ 57 and FIG. 5.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sekine to include the feature of: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through and after passing through a first of the two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns, as taught by Natsumi, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for “realizing fuel-efficient traveling even on a road with successive curved paths.” (Natsumi, ¶ 8.) Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that Natsumi’s teaching aligns with Sekine’s goal of preventing excessive acceleration and deceleration while passing through a series of curves. (See Sekine, ¶ 3.). Hence, modifying Sekine with Natsumi would yield the predictable result of an improved control system that optimizes a vehicle’s traversal through at least two successive curves.
As to claim 15, Sekine discloses: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to a target speed value which exceeds the constant target speed value after passing through the second turn (“Furthermore, as shown in Figure 5, for example, when the cruise control unit 19 is performing auto cruise control (constant speed control), if a series of curves C consisting of the first to sixth curves C1, ..., C6 is recognized in front of the vehicle A in the direction of travel, the vehicle A will decelerate from the first set speed V1 to the appropriate speed VS1 necessary to properly pass through the first curve C1 before reaching the entrance position of the series of curves C, that is, the entrance position CS1 of the first curve C1.” ¶ 26. “The appropriate vehicle speed setting unit 15 calculates appropriate speeds VS2, ..., VS6 for each curve C2, ..., C6 after the first curve C1. Then, for example, as in the fifth curve C5 shown in Figure 6, when the speed of vehicle A while it is being controlled at a constant speed by the cruise control unit 19 (for example, the appropriate speed VS1 in Figure 5) is greater than the appropriate speeds VS2, ..., VS6 for each curve C2, ..., C6, the target speed in the constant speed control is updated. In other words, by the time vehicle A reaches the entrance position CS5 of the fifth curve C5, vehicle A is decelerated from the appropriate speed VS1 to the appropriate speed VS5.” ¶ 27. Note: Summarizing, the speed of the motor vehicle is first adjusted to a target speed VS1 which is decelerated to target speed VS5, wherein VS5 is a speed value achieved after passing through at least a second turn.).
As to claim 16, Sekine discloses: wherein detecting whether two turns lie in an upcoming route section is performed on the basis of map data and a planned trajectory of the motor vehicle (“The storage unit 11 consists of a computer-readable recording medium such as a CD-ROM or DVD-ROM, and stores map data including road data.” ¶ 15. “The curve recognition unit 14 acquires road data stored in the storage unit 11 and detects curves present on the road ahead of the vehicle's direction of travel based on this road data.” ¶ 16.).
As to claim 17, Sekine discloses: a control device configured to execute the method of claim 11 (“cruise control unit 19” - ¶ 23.)
As to claim 18, Sekine fails to explicitly disclose: an automated motor vehicle, comprising the control device of claim 17.
Nevertheless, Natsumi teaches: an automated motor vehicle comprising a control device (“Vehicle 1 includes, as a component of a control system for controlling traveling of vehicle 1, autonomous travel device 2. Autonomous travel device 2 is a device that controls engine 3, clutch 4, gearbox 5, and brake device 40 to cause vehicle 1 to autonomously travel, and includes plural control devices.” ¶ 25.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sekine to include the feature of: an automated motor vehicle comprising a control device, as taught by Natsumi, with a reasonable expectation of success because it is well known in the art that autonomous vehicles may comprise autonomous cruise control functions such as those disclosed by Sekine. It is well known that such is useful for autonomous vehicle functionality.
Claim 12 is rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Sekine in view of Natsumi as applied to claim 11 — further in view of Mine et al. (US6208927B1; “Mine”) and in view of Desai et al. (US5515283A; “Desai”)
As to claim 12, the combination of Sekine and Natsumi fails to explicitly disclose: wherein detecting whether two turns lie in the upcoming route section comprises adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle.
Nevertheless, Mine teaches: adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle (A “total curve angle” may be acquired from the “sum of a total curve angle from various nodes representing various curves. See at least col. 3, ll. 37–42 and FIG. 7A.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mine teaches: adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine and Natsumi to include the feature of: adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle, as taught by Mine, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for aiding in determining “an allowable approaching speed is set at which the vehicle can approaches the curve.” (Mine, Abstract.)
The combination of Sekine, Natsumi and Mine fails to explicitly disclose:
comparing the total angle with a threshold value; and
detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section when the total angle exceeds the threshold value.
Nevertheless, Desai teaches: comparing a total angle with a threshold value; and detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section based on a comparison with total angle and the threshold value (Provided is an “angle threshold” wherein “if the angle α formed by segments 80 and 82 is less than some predetermined angle, then a turn restriction is generated that prevents a U-turn onto the opposite highway direction. In one embodiment, the angle threshold is 45 degrees.” Col. 6, ll. 11–29 and FIG. 4.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mine teaches: adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle. Desai teaches: comparing a total angle with a threshold value; and detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section based on a comparison with total angle and the threshold value.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine, Natsumi and Mine to include the feature of: comparing a total angle with a threshold value; and detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section based on a comparison with total angle and the threshold value, as taught by Desai, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for identifying a U-turn (i.e., two turns) in a planned trajectory.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that by definition a U-turn – representative of two turns – would constitute a 180 degrees turn. Hence, it would have been obvious to try out of a finite amount of possibilities to configure Desai’s angle threshold to be, for example, 180 degrees (or the like) in the context of Mine’s combined angle, such that when Mine’s combined angle meets or exceeds such a threshold then a determination of two turns may be made.
Claim 13 is rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Sekine in view of Natsumi, in view of Mine and in view of Desai as applied to claim 12 – further in view of Antony (US20190113351A1; “Antony”).
As to claim 13, the combination of Sekine, Natsumi, Mine and Desai fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the constant target speed value is selected as a function of the total angle.
Nevertheless, Antony teaches: wherein the constant target speed value is selected as a function of the total angle (“The vehicle computing system can determine a turn angle based in part on the trajectory of the autonomous vehicle relative to the next one of the one or more intersections.” ¶ 44. “The method 1000 can include determining that the velocity and/or turn angle satisfy one or more turn angle criteria (e.g., a combination of vehicle velocity and the turn angle that will allow the vehicle to safely enter the intersection).” ¶ 120.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mine teaches: adding up an angle of the first turn and an angle of the second turn to obtain a total angle. Desai teaches: comparing a total angle with a threshold value; and detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section based on a comparison with total angle and the threshold value. Antony teaches: wherein the constant target speed value is selected as a function of the total angle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine, Natsumi, Mine and Desai to include the feature of: wherein the constant target speed value is selected as a function of the total angle, as taught by Antony, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for determining a speed which is safe and/or optimal for traversing a turn. (See Antony, ¶ 120.)
Claims 14, 19 and 20 are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Sekine in view of Natsumi as applied to claim 11 — further in view of Mei et al. (US20220017071A1; “Mei”).
As to claim 14, the combination of Sekine and Natsumi fails to explicitly disclose: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn.
Nevertheless, Mei teaches: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn (“The basic principle is to decelerate when entering a bend, the vehicle is at a constant speed when turning in a steady state, and to accelerate when exiting a bend.” ¶ 48. NOTE: A total bend can be considered as two turns as such would align with Applicant’s definition of a total bend comprising two turns.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mei teaches: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine and Natsumi to include the feature of: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn, as taught by Mei, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for ensuring accuracy of vehicle control during turning within a bend (See at least Mei, ¶ 54.)
As to claim 19, the combination of Sekine and Natsumi fails to explicitly disclose a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium and executable by a computer so as to cause the processor to perform the method of claim 11.
Nevertheless, Mei teaches: a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium and executable by a computer so as to cause the processor to perform the method of claim 11 (Provided is “a computer device, comprising: a memory, a processor and computer programs stored in the memory can be executed by the processor.” ¶ 13.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mei teaches: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn; and a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium and executable by a computer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine and Natsumi to include the feature of: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium and executable by a computer so as to cause the processor to perform the method of claim 11, as taught by Mei, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is well known in the art as providing processing power to execute vehicle control.
As to claim 20, the combination of Sekine and Natsumi fails to explicitly disclose: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-readable commands that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method of claim 11.
Nevertheless, Mei teaches: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-readable commands that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method of claim 11 (Provided is “a computer device, comprising: a memory, a processor and computer programs stored in the memory can be executed by the processor.” ¶ 13.).
Sekine discloses: a method for automated longitudinal guidance, wherein upon detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, the method maintains a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value through a first of the two turns up to at least when a second of the two turns is reached. Natsumi teaches: maintaining a speed of the motor vehicle at a constant target speed value within a first turn of two turns until the vehicle is within a second of the two turns. Mei teaches: in response to detecting that two turns lie in the upcoming route section, adjusting the speed of the motor vehicle to the constant target speed value before the motor vehicle reaches the first turn; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-readable commands executable by a computer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sekine and Natsumi to include the feature of: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-readable commands that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method of claim 11, as taught by Mei, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is well known in the art as providing processing power to execute vehicle control.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Mario C. Gonzalez whose telephone number is (571) 272-5633. The Examiner can normally be reached M–F, 10:00–6:00 ET.
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, Fadey S. Jabr, can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
/MARIO C GONZALEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3668