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 .
Application Status
This office action is in response to the application filed on 06/15/2024. Claims 1-12 have been cancelled by preliminary amendment. Claims 13-30 have been added by preliminary amendment. Claims 13-30 are pending and rejected as detailed below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Applicant has claimed priority to foreign patents: RU2022101929 dated 01/28/2022, and PCT/RU2022/050401 dated 12/17/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted 01/17/2025, 01/18/2025, and 01/18/2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Fig. 1, steps 101, 02, 105, 106, and 107 are listed as optional in [0111] but are not drawn as optional in the figs like subsequent optional steps, i.e. using dashed lines
Fig. 8, optional item 206 not connected using dashed lines
Fig. 10, optional item 406 not connected using dashed lines
Fig. 19, steps 1410, 1420, 1450, 1460, and 1470 are listed as optional in [0155] but are not drawn as optional in the figs like subsequent optional steps, i.e. using dashed lines
Fig. 22 includes step 1433 repeated twice, one instance must be deleted and the figure corrected
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 101 line 5 2041 should be 6041
Page 101 line 8 2042 should be 6042
[0143] appears to be describing Fig. 13 but does not mention to what figure it is describing
[0146] appears to be describing Fig. 14 but does not mention to what figure it is describing
Page 122 line 16 method 1110 should be method 1100
Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 13-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Analysis of the claim(s) regarding subject matter eligibility utilizing the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance is described below.
STEP 1: STATUTORY CATEGORIES
Claim(s) 13-30 do fall into at least one of the four statutory subject matter categories. Claim 13 and its dependents are directed to a method which is the statutory category of a process. Claim 22 and its dependents are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores a program which is the statutory category of a manufacture.
STEP 2A: JUDICIAL EXCEPTIONS
PRONG 1: RECITATION OF A JUDICIAL EXCEPTION
The claim(s) recite(s):
- Claim 13 recite(s) an abstract idea belonging to the grouping of mental processes. Claim 13 recites, “generating a non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; determining a portion of a route that is associated with the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; determining a first estimated resource efficiency of the vehicle in operation that is associated with the portion of the route associated with the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; adjusting the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation in order to obtain a modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation,” The steps taken in the claim are all related to steps a person operating in a generic computing environment could take. The driver of a vehicle can determine a route between two points, determining portions that can be modified in order to improve energy efficiency, and modify the route to be taken. The person using a generic computer could determine which route is more resource efficient, whether its time, energy, or some other kind of resource. Claim 22 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale.
- Dependent claims 14-21 and 23-30 do not add any additional steps or any elements to take the claims out of an abstract idea. Merely dependent claims add steps to collect data and further determination steps.
PRONG 2: INTEGRATION INTO A PRACTICAL APPLICATION
The additional element(s) recited in the claim(s) beyond the judicial exception are collecting primary data, collecting secondary data, elements of the tracks, generation of alternate routes, the use of regenerative brakes, and the use of mandatory stops/deceleration points. The additional element(s) do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because the additional element(s) do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. The computer elements are merely used as a tool to perform the abstract idea, and the use of the judicial exception is generally linked to the particular technological environment of autonomous vehicle driving without using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way (MPEP 2106.04(d)).
STEP 2B: INVENTIVE CONCEPT/SIGNIFICANTLY MORE
The additional elements recited in the claim(s) are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they do not add more than insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), and the computer functions of receiving and transmitting data have been recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner or as insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Further, the additional elements of a “memory” and a “processor” recited in the claim(s) are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality (MPEP2106.05 (d)).
Based on the above analysis, claim(S) 13-30 is/are not eligible subject matter and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 13-14 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by Grossman (US PG Pub 2022/0171398).
Regarding claim 13, Grossman teaches a method for generating a modified resource-efficient track for a vehicle in operation, that is performed by a computer's CPU, ([0067] teaches the system having a CPU to carry out the method described) the method comprising at least the following steps:
generating a non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; ([0068]-[0069] teaches the system determining a non-modified track for a vehicle to follow with an estimated time of arrival)
determining a portion of a route that is associated with the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; ([0070] teaches the system dividing the travel path into a series of segments, i.e. a portion of the route)
determining a first estimated resource efficiency of the vehicle in operation that is associated with the portion of the route associated with the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; ([0071]-[0078] teaches the system determining a first fuel efficiency for the route segment based on a series of characteristics, including vehicle and route dependent values)
adjusting the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation in order to obtain a modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, the track including at least a second estimated resource efficiency of the vehicle in operation that is associated with the portion of the route associated with the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, wherein the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is adjusted, so that the second estimated resource efficiency of the vehicle in operation is different from the first estimated resource efficiency. ([0082]-[0086] teaches the system determining for the route a series of possible modifications to alter the route. These modifications include changes that would alter the efficiency of the route to a second efficiency. This efficiency is different from the first efficiency)
Claim 22 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale as recited above.
Regarding claim 14, Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is a first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, generated by means of a CPU of a computer device implementing the method for generating a resource-efficient track for the motor vehicle, the method comprising the following steps:
collecting primary data that involves obtaining data associated with a first motor vehicle, ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by the first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with the vehicle in operation, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) wherein the vehicle in operation passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle; ([0034] teaches the system capturing data as “historical data.” With this data the ego vehicle can perform a routing, this ego vehicle data is based on other Avs passing a given area prior to the current trip)
collecting secondary data that involves generating a track of the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route; ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
and generating a first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, ([0071]-[0078] teaches the system determining a first fuel efficiency for the route segment based on a series of characteristics, including vehicle and route dependent values) wherein the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is generated based on the track generated for the first motor vehicle; ([0050] teaches the system performing an optimized routing based on the historical data)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on a passed portion of the route; ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route. ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
Claim 23 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale as recited above.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 15-16 and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossman in view of Bauer (US PG Pub 2020/0108829).
Regarding claim 15, Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a highway that has been generated by a CPU of a computer device performing the steps according to a method for generating a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a highway, the method comprising at least the following steps: generating a first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation; ([0071]-[0078] teaches the system determining a first fuel efficiency for the route segment based on a series of characteristics, including vehicle and route dependent values, [0082]-[0086] further the generation of this route)
([0051] teaches the system determining the most efficient track for a given segment)
and assigning a resource-efficient track to the vehicle in operation, wherein the resource-efficient track to be assigned is one of the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation and the second resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation. ([0051] teaches the vehicle choosing to follow/execute a fuel efficient track)
Grossman does not teach determining a second motor vehicle that is located in front of the vehicle in operation in its direction of movement along the highway and generating a resource-efficient track for the second motor vehicle; generating a second resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, based on its speed profile and evaluation of its resource efficiency when the vehicle in operation is moving in accordance with the resource-efficient track for the second motor vehicle; and comparing the second resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation with the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation.
However, Bauer teaches “determining a second motor vehicle that is located in front of the vehicle in operation in its direction of movement along the highway and generating a resource-efficient track for the second motor vehicle” ([0046]-[0047] teaches a platoon fuel efficiency generation device. This can determine a lead vehicle moving ahead of other vehicles and generating a speed and efficiency profile for the lead vehicle) “generating a second resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, based on its speed profile and evaluation of its resource efficiency when the vehicle in operation is moving in accordance with the resource-efficient track for the second motor vehicle;” ([0047]-[0048] teach the vehicles in the platoon generating a speed/efficiency profile based off of the lead vehicle in the group) and “comparing the second resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation with the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation.” ([0054]-[0055] teach comparing an individual resource efficient track to the platoon based track for energy efficiency)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Grossman in view of Bauer; and have a reasonable expectation of success. Both relate to vehicle pathing and determining efficiency for a vehicle. As Bauer teaches in [0005] the use of adaptive cruise control for platooning vehicles can be inefficient. [0007]-[0008] of Bauer further teach that optimizing platoons’ efficiency is complicated. Using this system maximizes resource efficiency for the entire platoon. This system prevents any one vehicle from having a bad efficiency and improves the vehicles as a whole.
Claim 24 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale as above.
Regarding claim 16, Grossman teaches the method of claim 15, characterized in that the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is generated by means of the CPU of the computer device implementing the method for generating a resource-efficient track for the motor vehicle, the method comprising the following steps: collecting primary data that involves obtaining data associated with a first motor vehicle, ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by the first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with the vehicle in operation, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) wherein the vehicle in operation passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle; ([0034] teaches the system capturing data as “historical data.” With this data the ego vehicle can perform a routing, this ego vehicle data is based on other Avs passing a given area prior to the current trip)
collecting secondary data that involves generating a track of the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route; ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
and generating a first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, ([0071]-[0078] teaches the system determining a first fuel efficiency for the route segment based on a series of characteristics, including vehicle and route dependent values) wherein the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is generated based on the track generated for the first motor vehicle; ([0050] teaches the system performing an optimized routing based on the historical data)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on a passed portion of the route; ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route. ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
Claim 25 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale as above.
Claim(s) 17-18 and 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossman in view of Aggoune (US PG Pub 2023/0068356).
Regarding claim 17, Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is an adjustment resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, generated by means of a CPU of a computer device implementing a method for generating an adjustment resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, the method comprising at least the following steps: generating an adjustment resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, wherein the adjustment resource-efficient track is generated based on a main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, ([0090] teaches the system continually rerunning the efficiency determination based on the initial track, to make more efficient tracks) wherein a main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation includes at least an estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation on a portion of a route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, ([0090] teaches the main track will have a first fuel efficient speed profile for the vehicle) and wherein the estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation on the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, contains at least a first preferred speed range for the vehicle in operation on the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated; ([0090] teaches the vehicle track has a range of possible speeds, and the profile has multiple levels in order to make speed changes)
and wherein the step of generating an adjustment resource-efficient track comprises at least the following steps: determining a current location of the vehicle in operation, ([0028] teaches the system determining the vehicle location.)
determining an adjustment portion of the route, wherein its start coordinates match the current location of the vehicle in operation and its end coordinates match the start coordinates of the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, and wherein the start coordinates of the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, are located in the vehicle in operation's direction of movement; ([0068]-[0069] teaches the system determining a route to follow. A route is a route and the system can determine a route form any number of locations and include waypoints along the way, [0029]-[0030]. The use of the routing can determine how to guide a vehicle to various points along the way and generate efficient tracks for each waypoint segment)
collecting primary adjustment data, which involves obtaining data associated with the vehicle in operation and data associated with the adjustment portion of the route; ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route)
and generating an adjustment resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, wherein the adjustment resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation contains at least an estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation on the adjustment portion of the route, ([0053] teaches the system generating a speed profile for each segment of the route) and wherein the estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation contains the second preferred speed range for the vehicle in operation generated in such a way that when the vehicle in operation is moving at any of the speeds from the second preferred speed range, its speed at the start coordinates of the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, matches any of the speeds from the first preferred speed range for the vehicle in operation. ([0017]-[0018] teach the speed profiles having a series of available speeds and can match speeds between segments and based on historic data. [0077]-[0079] further this determination in order to match all speed regulations and speed ranges for a given area)
Grossman does not teach wherein the current location of the vehicle in operation does not correspond to its estimated location on the portion of the route.
However Aggoune teaches “wherein the current location of the vehicle in operation does not correspond to its estimated location on the portion of the route” (Fig. 16 teaches that a vehicle’s position on a route may not match the estimated position and if this is the case to determine a recalculated route to guide the vehicle. [0105] teaches planning a route based on the vehicle’s current location)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Grossman in view of Aggoune; and have a reasonable expectation of success. Both relate to controls for vehicles and determine efficient resource usage for a vehicle. Recalculating of a vehicle route after it is determined that the vehicle is not in the expected location ensures that the user still arrives at their destination. By being able to reroute when needed the system is able to appropriately capture all necessary efficiencies. This includes speed changes, historical properties, elevation changes, and/or traffic, Aggoune [0105]-[0106].
Claim 26 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale.
Regarding claim 18, Grossman teaches the method of claim 17, characterized in that the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is generated by means of the CPU of the computer device implementing a method for generating a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, the method comprising the following steps: collecting primary data that involves obtaining data associated with a first motor vehicle, ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by the first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with the vehicle in operation, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) wherein the vehicle in operation passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle; ([0034] teaches the system capturing data as “historical data.” With this data the ego vehicle can perform a routing, this ego vehicle data is based on other Avs passing a given area prior to the current trip)
collecting secondary data that involves generating a track of the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route; ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
and generating a first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, ([0071]-[0078] teaches the system determining a first fuel efficiency for the route segment based on a series of characteristics, including vehicle and route dependent values) wherein the first resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is generated based on the track generated for the first motor vehicle; ([0050] teaches the system performing an optimized routing based on the historical data)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on a passed portion of the route; ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
wherein the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation contains at least an estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation on the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, ([0017]-[0018] teach the generation of a speed profile for a portion of the route) and wherein the estimated speed profile of the vehicle in operation on the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated, contains at least the first preferred speed range for the vehicle in operation on the portion of the route, for which the main resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation was generated. ([0090] teaches the vehicle track has a range of possible speeds, and the profile has multiple levels in order to make speed changes)
Claim 27 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rationale.
Claim(s) 19-21 and 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossman in view of Cserna (US PG Pub 2020/0122588).
Regarding claim 19 Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a portion of a route containing a mandatory deceleration point that has been generated by a CPU of a computer device performing the steps according to a method for generating a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a portion of a route containing a mandatory deceleration point, the method comprising at least the following steps: collecting primary data, which involves obtaining data associated with the a motor vehicle, ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by a first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with a second motor vehicle, wherein the second motor vehicle is also a vehicle in operation and passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) and
collecting secondary data, which involves generating a track for the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route, ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route; ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
and
Grossman does not teach wherein the data associated with the portion of the route include at least data associated with the mandatory deceleration point; using the data associated with the mandatory deceleration point; wherein the data associated with a mandatory deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route that is adjoined or intersected by another portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an infrastructure element, which controls the movement of motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a traffic sign providing a speed limit for motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an obstacle, and/or a combination thereof.
However, Cserna teaches “wherein the data associated with the portion of the route include at least data associated with the mandatory deceleration point;” ([0031] and [0036] teach the system determining a series of possible deceleration points on the route of a vehicle) “using the data associated with the mandatory deceleration point;” ([0031] and [0036] teach the system determining a series of possible deceleration points on the route of a vehicle) and “wherein the data associated with a mandatory deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route that is adjoined or intersected by another portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an infrastructure element, which controls the movement of motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a traffic sign providing a speed limit for motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an obstacle, and/or a combination thereof.” ([0031] and [0036] teach a mandatory stopping point to be defined as a “road constraint” which includes, stop signs, traffic lights, junctions, etc.”
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Grossman and Cserna; and have a reasonable expectation of success. Both relate to the control of vehicles for efficiency purposes. As Cserna teaches in [0031]-[0036] the measurement of power consumption over a road network allows for the vehicle to determine an optimum fuel usage. As stops are a part of a road network, ensuring optimum stopping and routing around stops ensures that a vehicle is always moving as resource efficiently as possible.
Claim 28 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rational.
Regarding claim 20 Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is a recuperation resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation, that has been generated by a CPU of a computer device performing steps according to a method for generating a recuperation resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation equipped with a braking electric recuperation system moving along a portion of a route that includes a possible deceleration point, the method comprising at least the following steps: collecting primary data, which involves obtaining data associated with a first motor vehicle equipped with a braking electric recuperation system, , ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles. [0060] teaches that the vehicle data captured includes data associated with a regenerative braking system) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by a first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with a second motor vehicle, wherein the second motor vehicle is also a vehicle in operation and passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) and wherein the data associated with the portion of the route include at least data associated with a possible deceleration point; ([0016] and [0038] teach the collection of data related to possible deceleration conditions, including downhill driving, grade changes, road speed changes, etc.) collecting secondary data, which involves generating a track for the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route, ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.) and wherein the braking electric recuperation system is activated when the first motor vehicle is braking while moving along the portion of the route and passing the possible deceleration point; ([0060] teaches capturing data for regenerative braking usage as the vehicle moves through a location)
generating an estimated track for the second motor vehicle, wherein said estimated track is generated based on the track generated for the first motor vehicle; ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route, ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route; ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
wherein the data associated with the possible deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a mandatory deceleration point, data associated with a non-mandatory deceleration point, and/or a combination thereof; ([0016] and [0038] teach the collection of data related to possible deceleration conditions, including downhill driving, grade changes, road speed changes, etc.)
and wherein the data associated with a non-mandatory deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a non-mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an incline, data associated with a non-mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a visual obstruction, and/or a combination thereof. ([0016] and [0038] teach the collection of data related to possible deceleration conditions, including downhill driving, grade changes, road speed changes, etc.)
Grossman does not teach wherein resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route is evaluated on a basis of efficiency of the braking electric recuperation system of the first motor vehicle; and wherein the data associated with a mandatory deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route that is adjoined or intersected by another portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an infrastructure element, which controls the movement of motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a traffic sign providing a speed limit for motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an obstacle, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a turn, and/or a combination thereof.
However, Cserna teaches “wherein resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route is evaluated on a basis of efficiency of the braking electric recuperation system of the first motor vehicle” ([0048] teaches the system determining an efficient travel route with the basis of the use of regenerative braking to maintain resources effectively) and “wherein the data associated with a mandatory deceleration point include one of the following: data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route that is adjoined or intersected by another portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an infrastructure element, which controls the movement of motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing a traffic sign providing a speed limit for motor vehicles on the portion of the route, data associated with a mandatory deceleration point on a portion of a route containing an obstacle, and/or a combination thereof.” ([0031] and [0036] teach a mandatory stopping point to be defined as a “road constraint” which includes, stop signs, traffic lights, junctions, etc.”
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Grossman and Cserna; and have a reasonable expectation of success. Both relate to the control of vehicles for efficiency purposes. As Cserna teaches in [0031]-[0036] the measurement of power consumption over a road network allows for the vehicle to determine an optimum fuel usage. As stops are a part of a road network, ensuring optimum stopping and routing around stops ensures that a vehicle is always moving as resource efficiently as possible.
Claim 29 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rational.
Regarding claim 21 Grossman teaches the method of claim 13, characterized in that the non-modified resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation is a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a portion of a route containing a mandatory deceleration point that has been generated by a CPU of a computer device performing the steps according to a method for generating a resource-efficient track for the vehicle in operation moving along a portion of a route containing a mandatory deceleration point, the method comprising at least the following steps: collecting primary data, which involves obtaining data associated with the a motor vehicle, ([0091]-[0092] teach the system capturing data associated with a series of vehicles) data associated with a portion of a route to be passed by a first motor vehicle, ([0016] and [0038] teaches the system capturing data for a segment of the travel route, this data reflecting the grade of the route) and data associated with a second motor vehicle, wherein the second motor vehicle is also a vehicle in operation and passes the portion of the route after the first motor vehicle, ([0036]-[0039] and [0034] teach the system capturing ego vehicle data) and with an actual movement time of the first motor vehicle and data associated with a maximum movement time of the first motor vehicle before a mandatory stop; ([0068]-[0069] teach evaluating a route based on a time it would take for a vehicle to reach a point from a base movement time to a maximum time to reach the next point. This includes mandatory stop driving points like cutoffs for time of day or delivery time periods. [0080]-[0083] teach determining a track for the vehicle based on the times it would take to traverse the area and if the time period elapsed is acceptable) and wherein the data associated with the second motor vehicle include at least data associated with a movement time of the second motor vehicle that include data associated with an actual movement time of the second motor vehicle and data associated with a maximum movement time of the second motor vehicle before a mandatory stop; ([0068]-[0069] teach evaluating a route based on a time it would take for a vehicle to reach a point from a base movement time to a maximum time to reach the next point. This includes mandatory stop driving points like cutoffs for time of day or delivery time periods. [0080]-[0083] teach determining a track for the vehicle based on the times it would take to traverse the area and if the time period elapsed is acceptable)
collecting secondary data, which involves generating a track for the first motor vehicle, wherein said track is generated based on how the first motor vehicle passed the portion of the route, and wherein the first motor vehicle stops for a given period of time while moving along the portion of the route and passing the mandatory stop point; ([0068]-[0069] teach evaluating a route based on a time it would take for a vehicle to reach a point from a base movement time to a maximum time to reach the next point. [0080]-[0083] teach determining a track for the vehicle based on the times it would take to traverse the area and if the time period elapsed is acceptable)
generating an estimated track for the second motor vehicle, wherein said estimated track is generated based on the track generated for the first motor vehicle; ([0034] teaches the use of historical data to determine tracks of vehicles that had previously operated in the area, these tracks include lane changes, historical fuel efficiency, etc.)
wherein the track for the first motor vehicle is generated by performing the following steps: generating a speed profile of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route, ([0063] teaches the generation of a speed profile for a vehicle on a given route)
and evaluating resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route; ([0088] teaches evaluating a fuel efficiency for a vehicle on a route based on the speed profile of the vehicle)
wherein resource efficiency of the first motor vehicle on the passed portion of the route is evaluated on the basis of the first motor vehicle stopping at said mandatory stop point for a given period of time. ([0080]-[0083] teach determining if the time required to stop/arrival times meet the threshold times set by the routing device)
Grossman does not teach wherein the data associated with the portion of the route include at least data associated with the mandatory deceleration point.
However, Cserna teaches “wherein the data associated with the portion of the route include at least data associated with the mandatory deceleration point;” ([0031] and [0036] teach the system determining a series of possible deceleration points on the route of a vehicle)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Grossman and Cserna; and have a reasonable expectation of success. Both relate to the control of vehicles for efficiency purposes. As Cserna teaches in [0031]-[0036] the measurement of power consumption over a road network allows for the vehicle to determine an optimum fuel usage. As stops are a part of a road network, ensuring optimum stopping and routing around stops ensures that a vehicle is always moving as resource efficiently as possible.
Claim 30 is substantially similar and would be rejected for the same rational.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pryakhin (US PG Pub 2010/0057339) teaches determining an energy optimized route for a vehicle. In one example, the method includes providing a plurality of cost factors, each cost factor influencing the energy consumption of the vehicle. At least one cost factor is selected from among the cost factors. A composite cost factor is determined using the selected at least one cost factor. An energy optimized route is then determined based on the composite cost factor. Systems are also provided for determining an energy optimized route for a vehicle. An example system includes a set of cost factors, each cost factor influencing the energy consumption of the vehicle. A classification unit is included for selecting cost factors for the route and for including the selected cost factors in a composite cost factor for the route. A calculator is also included for calculating the energy optimized route based on the composite cost factor.
Schunder (US PG Pub 2011/0166774) teaches a route-determination method includes gathering road-related data in a vehicle navigation system (VNS) for a plurality of routes between two locations. This may include weighting two or more of the possible routes in the VNS based at least on the road-related data. Also, this may include adjusting the weighting in the VNS for each weighted route based on projected fuel consumption and determining an optimal fuel usage route in the VNS based on the adjusted weighting. Further, this may include outputting at least one optimal fuel usage route.
Shiri (US PG Pub 2014/0032087) teaches using a database of route segments, calculating optimal velocity and acceleration profiles, and suggesting these profiles to a user or the cruise control system of the vehicle, based on a route analysis and incorporating external and local data sources relating to environmental (e.g. topographic, meteorological) conditions, traffic conditions and user preferences and characteristics.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS STRYKER whose telephone number is (571)272-4659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/N.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665