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 Office Action is in response to the application filed on 07/01/2024. Claims 16-30 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claims 1-15 were cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "the device is configured to" in claim 16-22, 24, and 26-27.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to Claim 16, the claim element “the device” is a limitation that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function. Examiner is unable to find the corresponding structure in the Specification because the sections of Applicant's Specification that discuss these elements do not include the corresponding structure (See at least, Page 3 Lines 24-26 for “the device” of the Applicant's Specification). Therefore, claims 16-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph. Appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to Claim 16, the claim element “the device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre
AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function. Examiner is unable to find the corresponding structure in the Specification because the sections of Applicant's Specification that discuss these elements do not include the corresponding structure (See at least, Page 3 Lines 24-26 for “the device” of the Applicant's Specification). Therefore, claims 16-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 22 contains circular logic as the start of the first reference profile is not known before the calculation of the distance metric but is required to calculate the distance metric anyway. Therefore, the Examiner interprets the limitation to mean that target trajectory and map section knowledge is needed to calculate the distance between the first point on the calculated route section and the start of the map section.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 23 contains circular logic as the start of the first reference profile is not known before the calculation of the distance metric used for determining the start of the very same first reference profile that already required the first reference profile to do so, in claim 22, upon which claim 23 depends. Therefore, the Examiner interprets the limitation to mean that target trajectory and map section knowledge is needed to calculate the distance between the first point on the calculated route section and the start of the map section as well as map orientation and route orientation to the map, as it is unclear what the map profile is supposed to be deviating from.
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 16-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per claim 16
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (a device for determining).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A device for determining a reference profile of a core road section, wherein the device is configured to:
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section;
assign a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel; and
determine a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step falls within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A device for determining a reference profile of a core road section, wherein the device is configured to:
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section;
assign a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel; and
determine a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence.
The additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than merely applying a set of route determinations in a vehicular environment, which is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 16 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 17-27
These apparatus claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 16, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the display of determination of vehicle routes on a map, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 28
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (a device for determining).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A device for determining a reference driving path for a road section, wherein the device is configured to:
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section;
determine a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths;
arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile;
foreach of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and
determine at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step falls within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A device for determining a reference driving path for a road section, wherein the device is configured to:
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section;
determine a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths;
arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile;
foreach of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and
determine at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
The additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than merely applying a set of route determinations in a vehicular environment, which is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 28 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claim 29
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method for determining).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method for determining a reference profile of a core road section, comprising:
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section;
assigning a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel; and
determining, on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence, a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step falls within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method for determining a reference profile of a core road section, comprising:
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section;
assigning a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel; and
determining, on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence, a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence.
The additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than merely applying a set of route determinations in a vehicular environment, which is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 29 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claim 30
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method for determining).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method for determining a reference driving path for a road section, comprising:
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section;
determining a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths;
arranging a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile;
determining, for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and
determining at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step falls within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method for determining a reference driving path for a road section, comprising:
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section;
determining a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths;
arranging a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile;
determining, for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and
determining at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
The additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than merely applying a set of route determinations in a vehicular environment, which is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 30 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
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.
Claims 16, 17, 26, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Jiang et al., US-20200125102-A1, hereinafter referred to as Jiang.
As per claim 16
Jiang discloses [a] device for determining a reference profile of a core road section, wherein the device is configured to (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane – Jiang ¶55):
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section (wherein the lane configuration database stores a plurality of lane reference lines of a plurality of road segments of a plurality of roads, and wherein each of the reference lines is generated based on prior trajectories of vehicles navigating through a corresponding road segment – Jiang Claim 3);
assign a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel (FIG. 7B shows the trajectories that have been projected onto the road segment of the navigation map, where the trajectories represent the paths a number of vehicles have driven through the same road segment for a period of time, determines lane configuration of the road segment based on the driving behaviors, such as, a number of lanes within the road segment, lane width, and lane reference line, etc. of each lane. In operation 804, lane metadata or configuration information describing the lane configuration is generated – Jiang ¶58 & ¶63);
determine a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane. For example, lane reference line generator 502 may calculate an average trajectory from all of the trajectories within the same lane to represent the lane reference line. In one embodiment, prior to calculating a lane reference line, some of the outlier trajectories may be removed from consideration. In addition, a smoothing operation such as polynomial fitting may be performed to smooth the trajectories prior to calculating the lane reference line – Jiang ¶55).
As per claim 17
Jiang further discloses wherein the device is further configured to: identify one or more measured driving paths from the first subset of measured driving paths as outliers; and leave the one or more identified measured driving paths unconsidered when determining the first reference profile of the core road section (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane. For example, lane reference line generator 502 may calculate an average trajectory from all of the trajectories within the same lane to represent the lane reference line. In one embodiment, prior to calculating a lane reference line, some of the outlier trajectories may be removed from consideration. In addition, a smoothing operation such as polynomial fitting may be performed to smooth the trajectories prior to calculating the lane reference line – Jiang ¶55).
As per claim 26
Jiang further discloses wherein the device is configured to have the effect that a vehicle is operated on the basis of the determined first reference profile of the core road section in a run through the core road section (reference lines with optional lane width of the lanes are then returned to the ADV to enable the ADV to plan and control the ADV – Jiang ¶21).
As per claim 29
Jiang discloses [a] method for determining a reference profile of a core road section, comprising (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane – Jiang ¶55):
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the core road section (wherein the lane configuration database stores a plurality of lane reference lines of a plurality of road segments of a plurality of roads, and wherein each of the reference lines is generated based on prior trajectories of vehicles navigating through a corresponding road segment – Jiang Claim 3);
assigning a first subset of measured driving paths from the multiplicity of measured driving paths to a first section sequence from a set of different section sequences, wherein the different section sequences each contain the core road section and at least one surrounding road section arranged directly in front of and/or directly behind the core road section in the direction of travel (FIG. 7B shows the trajectories that have been projected onto the road segment of the navigation map, where the trajectories represent the paths a number of vehicles have driven through the same road segment for a period of time, determines lane configuration of the road segment based on the driving behaviors, such as, a number of lanes within the road segment, lane width, and lane reference line, etc. of each lane. In operation 804, lane metadata or configuration information describing the lane configuration is generated – Jiang ¶58 & ¶63);
determining, on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths for the first section sequence, a first reference profile of the core road section for the first section sequence (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane. For example, lane reference line generator 502 may calculate an average trajectory from all of the trajectories within the same lane to represent the lane reference line. In one embodiment, prior to calculating a lane reference line, some of the outlier trajectories may be removed from consideration. In addition, a smoothing operation such as polynomial fitting may be performed to smooth the trajectories prior to calculating the lane reference line – Jiang ¶55).
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.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, as per claim 16, and further in view of Shigezumi et al., US-20160091326-A1, and Mund et al., US-20140132608-A1, hereinafter referred to as Shigezumi, and Mund.
As per claim 18
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured to: determine a respective overall length for the one or more measured driving paths of the first subset of measured driving paths; determine a respective sequence of path points on a corresponding sequence of consecutive running length positions for the one or more measured driving paths from the first subset of measured driving paths, wherein the consecutive running length positions are relative to the overall length of the respective measured driving path.
However, Shigezumi teaches wherein the device is further configured to: determine a respective overall length for the one or more measured driving paths of the first subset of measured driving paths; determine a respective sequence of path points on a corresponding sequence of consecutive running length positions for the one or more measured driving paths from the first subset of measured driving paths, wherein the consecutive running length positions are relative to the overall length of the respective measured driving path (navigation system has been proposed, which accumulates traveling history data including information of trajectories and velocities of many vehicles that have actually traveled and searches the optimal traveling path using the data, trajectories are indicated by nodes corresponding to observation points, calculates a distance between the observation points, identifiers of nodes serving as start points and end points of the links included in trajectories and corresponding to the observation points, planar graph generating unit 13 associates a node included in the trajectory α and located in the distance approximation region 104 with a node that is included in the partial path Π - Shigezumi ¶5 & ¶52 & ¶55 & ¶56 & ¶99).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Shigezumi teaches a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body, as taught by Shigezumi, with a reasonable expectation of success for executing analysis related to a path of a moving body as spatial information analysis, see Shigezumi ¶3 for details.
Jiang does not specifically disclose for each of the running length positions, on the basis of a trimmed average, of the path points of the measured driving paths, determine a corresponding path point of the first reference profile in order to determine a sequence of path points of the first reference profile on the corresponding sequence of consecutive running length positions of the first reference profile.
However, Mund teaches for each of the running length positions, on the basis of a trimmed average, of the path points of the measured driving paths, determine a corresponding path point of the first reference profile in order to determine a sequence of path points of the first reference profile on the corresponding sequence of consecutive running length positions of the first reference profile (A graph containing at first all possible paths is then simplified…remove all nodes with a longitudinal distance between the matching candidate and the corresponding trace point greater than a predefined maximal longitudinal distance…various paths may be scored 30 so that from among them a best path may be selected 32. The scoring is, preferably, based on the number of connected nodes in the longest path to which the node belongs and/or the mean distance…During or after the scoring step 30, edges and/or nodes may removed if the score is lower than others. This will further simplify the graph. - Mund ¶37).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Mund teaches an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more-line segments in a digital vector map.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more line segments in a digital vector map, as taught by Mund, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved map matching algorithm that works with uni-directional and bi-directional networks, see Mund ¶10 for details.
As per claim 19
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured, for a running length position from the sequence of consecutive running length positions, to: identify one or more path points of the measured driving paths as outliers; and leave the one or more identified path points of the measured driving paths unconsidered when determining the corresponding path point of the first reference profile.
However, Mund teaches wherein the device is further configured, for a running length position from the sequence of consecutive running length positions, to: identify one or more path points of the measured driving paths as outliers; and leave the one or more identified path points of the measured driving paths unconsidered when determining the corresponding path point of the first reference profile (A graph containing at first all possible paths is then simplified…remove all nodes with a longitudinal distance between the matching candidate and the corresponding trace point greater than a predefined maximal longitudinal distance…various paths may be scored 30 so that from among them a best path may be selected 32. The scoring is, preferably, based on the number of connected nodes in the longest path to which the node belongs and/or the mean distance…During or after the scoring step 30, edges and/or nodes may removed if the score is lower than others. This will further simplify the graph. - Mund ¶37).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Mund teaches an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more-line segments in a digital vector map.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more line segments in a digital vector map, as taught by Mund, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved map matching algorithm that works with uni-directional and bi-directional networks, see Mund ¶10 for details.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, Shigezumi, and Mund, as per claim 18, and further in view of Fowe, US-20200286372-A1, hereinafter referred to as Fowe.
As per claim 20
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured to: determine an empirical speed for a segment of the first reference profile between a first path point and a second path point of the first reference profile by: determining first speed values for the one or more corresponding first path points of the first subset of measured path points from which the first path point of the first reference profile was determined, determining second speed values for the one or more corresponding second path points of the first subset of measured path points from which the second path point of the first reference profile was determined.
However, Shigezumi teaches wherein the device is further configured to: determine an empirical speed for a segment of the first reference profile between a first path point and a second path point of the first reference profile by: determining first speed values for the one or more corresponding first path points of the first subset of measured path points from which the first path point of the first reference profile was determined, determining second speed values for the one or more corresponding second path points of the first subset of measured path points from which the second path point of the first reference profile was determined (provides velocity information to links between continuous observation points…calculates a distance between the observation points…provides, as a velocity of a link between the observation points, velocity information providing unit 11 may store velocity information of links between observation points as a list in which the velocity information of the links between the observation points…identifiers of nodes serving as start points and end points of the links included in trajectories and corresponding to the observation points, the average of the velocities indicated by the velocity information held by the continuous observation points may be provided as velocity information of links between the observation points - Shigezumi ¶55 & ¶56 & ¶57).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Shigezumi teaches a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body, as taught by Shigezumi, with a reasonable expectation of success for executing analysis related to a path of a moving body as spatial information analysis, see Shigezumi ¶3 for details.
Jiang does not specifically disclose determining the empirical speed for the segment of the first reference profile on the basis of an average of the first and/or second speed values.
However, Fowe teaches determining the empirical speed for the segment of the first reference profile on the basis of an average of the first and/or second speed values (establishing lane-level speed profiles for road segments and strands of road segments based on historical vehicle probe data, determine, from each trajectory of the plurality of probe apparatuses map-matched to the lanes of the road segment, average path speeds along each lane of the road segment; aggregate average path speeds along each lane of the road segment…generate a lane-level speed profile for the road segment - Fowe Abstract & ¶4).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Fowe teaches using historical vehicle speed data to establish speed profiles on a lane level of granularity for road segments and for a series of road segments.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, using historical vehicle speed data to establish speed profiles on a lane level of granularity for road segments and for a series of road segments, as taught by Fowe, with a reasonable expectation of success for average path speeds along each lane of the road segment, see Fowe Abstract for details.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, as per claim 16, and further in view of Mund.
As per claim 21
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured to: based on a digital map in relation to the core road section, determine a map profile of the core road section recorded in the digital map; and determine the first reference profile of the core road section on the basis of the map profile as well.
However, Mund teaches wherein the device is further configured to: based on a digital map in relation to the core road section, determine a map profile of the core road section recorded in the digital map; and determine the first reference profile of the core road section on the basis of the map profile as well (FIG. 7 is a view as in FIG. 3 showing an exemplary probe trace with insufficient quality in the form of an outlier, A graph containing at first all possible paths is then simplified…remove all nodes with a longitudinal distance between the matching candidate and the corresponding trace point greater than a predefined maximal longitudinal distance…various paths may be scored 30 so that from among them a best path may be selected 32. The scoring is, preferably, based on the number of connected nodes in the longest path to which the node belongs and/or the mean distance…During or after the scoring step 30, edges and/or nodes may removed if the score is lower than others. This will further simplify the graph. - Mund ¶21 & ¶37).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Mund teaches an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more-line segments in a digital vector map.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, an improved method for matching traces derived from probe data to one or more line segments in a digital vector map, as taught by Mund, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved map matching algorithm that works with uni-directional and bi-directional networks, see Mund ¶10 for details.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, and Mund, as per claim 21, and further in view of Sekiguchi et al., US-20190347249-A1, hereinafter referred to as Sekiguchi.
As per claim 22
Jiang further discloses wherein the device is further configured to: determine a start and/or an end of the map profile (request may include a starting point and an ending point of a road reference line obtained from a standard navigation map at the ADV. Based on the starting point and the end point, identify and determine a map segment of a navigation map…map module 308 can obtain a road reference line of a road between the starting location and the destination location. – Jiang ¶21 & ¶50).
Jiang does not specifically disclose determine a corresponding start and/or a corresponding end of the first reference profile based on a distance metric, wherein: the distance metric for determining the start of the first reference profile depends on a distance between the start of the map profile and the start, to be determined, of the first reference profile, and/or the distance metric for determining the end of the first reference profile depends on a distance between the end of the map profile and the end, to be determined, of the first reference profile.
However, Sekiguchi teaches determine a corresponding start and/or a corresponding end of the first reference profile based on a distance metric, wherein: the distance metric for determining the start of the first reference profile depends on a distance between the start of the map profile and the start, to be determined, of the first reference profile, and/or the distance metric for determining the end of the first reference profile depends on a distance between the end of the map profile and the end, to be determined, of the first reference profile (the first main map data 500 assumed to correspond to the coordinates of a lower left point of the zone T1C in the first route…distance between the points assumed to be zero, the distance between the node on the first main map data 500 and the node on the first route calculation data 700 is calculated - Sekiguchi ¶68).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Sekiguchi teaches an in-vehicle device and a map updating system.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, an in-vehicle device and a map updating system, as taught by Sekiguchi, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the possible adverse effect of incomplete map update can be reduced, see Sekiguchi ¶90 for details.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, Mund, and Sekiguchi as per claim 22, and further in view of Kobilarov, US-20220250646-A1, hereinafter referred to as Kobilarov.
As per claim 23
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein: the distance metric for determining the start of the first reference profile depends on a deviation of an orientation of the map profile at the start of the map profile and an orientation of the first reference profile at the start, to be determined, of the first reference profile, and/or the distance metric for determining the end of the first reference profile depends on a deviation of an orientation of the map profile at the end of the map profile and an orientation of the first reference profile at the end, to be determined, of the first reference profile.
However, Kobilarov teaches wherein: the distance metric for determining the start of the first reference profile depends on a deviation of an orientation of the map profile at the start of the map profile and an orientation of the first reference profile at the start, to be determined, of the first reference profile, and/or the distance metric for determining the end of the first reference profile depends on a deviation of an orientation of the map profile at the end of the map profile and an orientation of the first reference profile at the end, to be determined, of the first reference profile (determine the route based at least in part on a map, a start position and an end position, identify a curve over the start position to end position parameterized using arc length, corresponding pose of the route…a pose comprises a position and orientation (rotation), so a current position 210 of the vehicle may be mapped to a position identified by the route, i.e., the current route position 206 - Kobilarov Fig 2 (202-232) + ¶43 & ¶44 & ¶45).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Kobilarov teaches a system for determining and tracking a trajectory for controlling a vehicle.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a system for determining and tracking a trajectory for controlling a vehicle, as taught by Kobilarov, with a reasonable expectation of success to identify a location within a lane that is safer, more efficient, or the like for the vehicle 102, such as based on a location of a roadway edge 112 and/or a lane edge indication 114, see Kobilarov ¶26 for details.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, as per claim 16, and further in view of Schack et al., US-20190266419-A1, hereinafter referred to as Schack.
As per claim 24
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured to: arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the first reference profile; for each measured driving path from the first subset of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and on the basis of the determined sequences of points of intersection for the first subset of measured driving paths, determine at least one reference driving path for the core road section for the first section sequence.
However, Schack teaches wherein the device is further configured to: arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the first reference profile; for each measured driving path from the first subset of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and on the basis of the determined sequences of points of intersection for the first subset of measured driving paths, determine at least one reference driving path for the core road section for the first section sequence (points of intersection of the DLM lane markings and the DLM lanes with the orthogonal section are ascertained 52…are designated as map points of intersection...An example of such map points of intersection is shown in FIG. 5. A road FB with four traffic lanes FS which are spaced from each other by road markings FBM as well as the associated traffic lane middle FSM can be seen…starting position AP, the constructed orthogonal line OL and the map points of intersection, divided according to points of intersection SPM with the DLM lane markings (marking point of intersection), and points of intersection SPL with the DLM lanes (lane point of intersection). For each map point of intersection, In FIG. 4, the paths of the regular route are identified by solid lines; the paths in the case of a deviation from the regular route are indicated by dashed arrows - Schack ¶69 & ¶89).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Schack teaches a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision, as taught by Schack, with a reasonable expectation of success to determine the lateral position of a vehicle relative to a lane, see Schack ¶8 for details.
Claims 25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, as per claim 16, and further in view of Shigezumi.
As per claim 25
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the first section sequence contains the core road section and a particular surrounding road section arranged directly after or before the core road section; and wherein the device is further configured to: determine a reference driving path for the core road section on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths and using the first reference profile, determine a following or preceding reference driving path for the particular surrounding road section, and join the reference driving path for the core road section to the following or preceding reference driving path for the particular surrounding road section in order to determine a sequence driving path for the first section sequence.
However, Shigezumi teaches wherein the first section sequence contains the core road section and a particular surrounding road section arranged directly after or before the core road section; and wherein the device is further configured to: determine a reference driving path for the core road section on the basis of the first subset of measured driving paths and using the first reference profile, determine a following or preceding reference driving path for the particular surrounding road section, and join the reference driving path for the core road section to the following or preceding reference driving path for the particular surrounding road section in order to determine a sequence driving path for the first section sequence (navigation system has been proposed, which accumulates traveling history data including information of trajectories and velocities of many vehicles that have actually traveled and searches the optimal traveling path using the data, trajectories are indicated by nodes corresponding to observation points, calculates a distance between the observation points, identifiers of nodes serving as start points and end points of the links included in trajectories and corresponding to the observation points, planar graph generating unit 13 associates a node included in the trajectory α and located in the distance approximation region 104 with a node that is included in the partial path Π - Shigezumi ¶5 & ¶52 & ¶55 & ¶56 & ¶99).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Shigezumi teaches a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body, as taught by Shigezumi, with a reasonable expectation of success for executing analysis related to a path of a moving body as spatial information analysis, see Shigezumi ¶3 for details.
As per claim 27
Jiang does not specifically disclose wherein the device is further configured to: provide the first reference profile together with a profile of an empirical speed along the first reference profile as map data in relation to the core road section for a digital map.
However, Shigezumi teaches wherein the device is further configured to: provide the first reference profile together with a profile of an empirical speed along the first reference profile as map data in relation to the core road section for a digital map (provides velocity information to links between continuous observation points…calculates a distance between the observation points…provides, as a velocity of a link between the observation points, velocity information providing unit 11 may store velocity information of links between observation points as a list in which the velocity information of the links between the observation points…identifiers of nodes serving as start points and end points of the links included in trajectories and corresponding to the observation points, the average of the velocities indicated by the velocity information held by the continuous observation points may be provided as velocity information of links between the observation points - Shigezumi ¶55 & ¶56 & ¶57).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Shigezumi teaches a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a technique for analyzing a movement path of a moving body, as taught by Shigezumi, with a reasonable expectation of success for executing analysis related to a path of a moving body as spatial information analysis, see Shigezumi ¶3 for details.
Claims 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, in view of Schack.
As per claim 28
Jiang discloses [a] device for determining a reference driving path for a road section, wherein the device is configured to (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane – Jiang ¶55):
determine a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section (wherein the lane configuration database stores a plurality of lane reference lines of a plurality of road segments of a plurality of roads, and wherein each of the reference lines is generated based on prior trajectories of vehicles navigating through a corresponding road segment – Jiang Claim 3);
determine a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane. For example, lane reference line generator 502 may calculate an average trajectory from all of the trajectories within the same lane to represent the lane reference line. In one embodiment, prior to calculating a lane reference line, some of the outlier trajectories may be removed from consideration. In addition, a smoothing operation such as polynomial fitting may be performed to smooth the trajectories prior to calculating the lane reference line – Jiang ¶55).
Jiang does not specifically disclose arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile; for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and determine at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
However, Schack teaches arrange a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile; for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, determine a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and determine at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths (points of intersection of the DLM lane markings and the DLM lanes with the orthogonal section are ascertained 52…are designated as map points of intersection...An example of such map points of intersection is shown in FIG. 5. A road FB with four traffic lanes FS which are spaced from each other by road markings FBM as well as the associated traffic lane middle FSM can be seen…starting position AP, the constructed orthogonal line OL and the map points of intersection, divided according to points of intersection SPM with the DLM lane markings (marking point of intersection), and points of intersection SPL with the DLM lanes (lane point of intersection). For each map point of intersection, In FIG. 4, the paths of the regular route are identified by solid lines; the paths in the case of a deviation from the regular route are indicated by dashed arrows - Schack ¶69 & ¶89).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Schack teaches a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision, as taught by Schack, with a reasonable expectation of success to determine the lateral position of a vehicle relative to a lane, see Schack ¶8 for details.
As per claim 30
Jiang discloses [a] method for determining a reference driving path for a road section, comprising (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane – Jiang ¶55):
determining a multiplicity of measured driving paths of one or more vehicles for a corresponding multiplicity of runs through the road section (wherein the lane configuration database stores a plurality of lane reference lines of a plurality of road segments of a plurality of roads, and wherein each of the reference lines is generated based on prior trajectories of vehicles navigating through a corresponding road segment – Jiang Claim 3);
determining a reference profile of the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of measured driving paths (reference line generator 502 calculates a reference line based on the trajectories corresponding to the lane. For example, lane reference line generator 502 may calculate an average trajectory from all of the trajectories within the same lane to represent the lane reference line. In one embodiment, prior to calculating a lane reference line, some of the outlier trajectories may be removed from consideration. In addition, a smoothing operation such as polynomial fitting may be performed to smooth the trajectories prior to calculating the lane reference line – Jiang ¶55).
Jiang does not specifically disclose arranging a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile; determining, for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and determining at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths.
However, Schack teaches arranging a sequence of interpolation point planes along the reference profile; determining, for each of the multiplicity of measured driving paths, a respective sequence of points of intersection of the respective measured driving path with the corresponding sequence of interpolation point planes; and determining at least one reference driving path for the road section on the basis of the multiplicity of determined sequences of points of intersection for the corresponding multiplicity of measured driving paths (points of intersection of the DLM lane markings and the DLM lanes with the orthogonal section are ascertained 52…are designated as map points of intersection...An example of such map points of intersection is shown in FIG. 5. A road FB with four traffic lanes FS which are spaced from each other by road markings FBM as well as the associated traffic lane middle FSM can be seen…starting position AP, the constructed orthogonal line OL and the map points of intersection, divided according to points of intersection SPM with the DLM lane markings (marking point of intersection), and points of intersection SPL with the DLM lanes (lane point of intersection). For each map point of intersection, In FIG. 4, the paths of the regular route are identified by solid lines; the paths in the case of a deviation from the regular route are indicated by dashed arrows - Schack ¶69 & ¶89).
Jiang discloses autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles. Schack teaches a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision.
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 Jiang, an autonomous driving system using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles with, a system for determining the lateral position of a vehicle relative to the lanes of a road, and for determining a relative lateral position with sub-lane precision, as taught by Schack, with a reasonable expectation of success to determine the lateral position of a vehicle relative to a lane, see Schack ¶8 for details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIS ASIM SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-6426. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:30 M-F 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, Fadey S. Jabr can be reached at 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.
/F.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights