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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/28/2026 have been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
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.
Claims 1-2, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kostermann et al. US 20220105956.
Regarding claim 1, Kostermann et al. disclose A method for monitoring surroundings of a vehicle of a first road user, wherein the vehicle has comprises at least one signal receiver, a communication device for receiving data messages from another road user and an evaluation circuit, (Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 abstract; paragraphs [0009]; [0014]-[0018]; [0025]-[0032]; [0038]-[0043]; [0056]-[0059]; [0063]-[0069]; [0080]-[0089]; figures 1-5;)
The method 100 enables the vehicles/receiver vehicles which receive the environment information with the reliability information to assess the accuracy and/or the credibility/validity/plausibility of the environment information on the basis of the reliability information. The environment information is taken into account, for example, according to a weighting based on the reliability information during a control of the receiver vehicles. The method 100 allows the receiver vehicles, for example, to weight environment information regarded as credible/valid/plausible more heavily than environment information that is regarded as not credible/valid/plausible, such as, for example, incorrect or erroneous messages/notifications. An unwanted influence of these messages/notifications can be reduced in this way (Kostermann et al. par. 56). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64). The one or more interfaces 212 can further comprise at least one interface to a sensor of the transportation vehicle 200 to allow the data processing circuit 214 to receive sensor data from the sensor for validation (Kostermann et al. par. 65).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received.
comprising: receiving a data message from an other road user at the communication device, wherein the data message contains sensor information from the other road user;
The method 100 optionally comprises receiving information relating to a sensor type of at least one sensor with which the environment information has been determined by the other transportation vehicle. The method 100 can further comprise selecting a different sensor type on the basis of the information relating to the sensor type for comparing the environment information with the sensor data of the different sensor type (Kostermann et al. par. 57). The one or more interfaces 212 can further comprise at least one interface to a sensor of the transportation vehicle 200 to allow the data processing circuit 214 to receive sensor data from the sensor for validation (Kostermann et al. par. 65). The transportation vehicle 200, along with the transportation vehicle 500, receives the environment information with the message 402 using the device 210 according to the method 100 and validates the environment information to generate the reliability information. During the validation, the transportation vehicle 200 verifies, for example, the environment information in the message 402 which indicates, for example: “Wrong-way driver detected”. The environment information relating to the wrong-way driver can be confirmed or refuted by a sensor system and/or a query to a driver or front-seat passenger of the transportation vehicle 200 (Kostermann et al. par. 84).
using the signal receiver to receive signals including signals that are from the other road user and the signal are separate from the data message, checking plausibility of the data message from the other road user, wherein the plausibility check comprises a check by the evaluation circuit in order to determine whether the sensor information contained in the data message corresponds to the signals received by the signal receiver.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, a transmitting of the environment information by the other transportation vehicle and the receiving 110 of the environment information can be performed by different concepts and corresponding methods or mechanisms for communication between transportation vehicles. The communication (the transmitting and receiving 110) takes place, for example, via vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or car-to-car (C2C) communication, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or car-to-infrastructure (C2I) communication, vehicle-to-anything (V2X) or car-to-anything (C2X) communication. Corresponding methods or mechanisms for receiving 110 comprise, for example, an interface for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and/or for communication via the mobile radiocommunication network (for example, a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) interface, such as a PC5 interface) (Kostermann et al. par. 43). The validation 120 of the environment information can be understood as a verification of the reliability, plausibility or credibility of the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 44). The transportation vehicle can optionally be equipped with a plurality of sensors. The sensor data can accordingly contain measurement data from a plurality of sensors. The transportation vehicle can be equipped with the at least one sensor during manufacture for autonomous driving, the sensor serving, for example, to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The sensor data can accordingly be data which serve to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The one or more sensors comprise, for example, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor and/or the like. The one or more sensors optionally comprise at least one rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS), a sensor of an airbag and/or the like. The sensor data can accordingly contain information relating to the weather and/or the road characteristic in the environment and/or relating to a speed and/or an acceleration of the transportation vehicle. The sensor data can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the environment information. The environment information can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the sensor data. The validation 120 provides, for example, a comparison of shapes, sizes and/or positions for the same object in the environment derived from the sensor data and the environment information. A simpler plausibility check can be carried out before the validation by the sensor data. Sensor data which indicate an implausible situation (e.g., a wrong-way driver on carriageways that are not structurally separated) can be disqualified for the validation and only plausible sensor data can be used for the validation. Map data of a navigation system, for example, can be used as a basis for a plausibility check of this type. A result of a plausibility check of this type can optionally be used as an input parameter for the validation with the sensor data, e.g., as a weighting and/or to adjust threshold values (Kostermann et al. par. 46). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64). As described above, the environment information can be received with the reliability information, in particular by the transportation vehicle from which the environment information was transmitted for validation or which transmitted the environment information for validation. FIG. 3 shows a block diagram of a flow diagram of an example embodiment of a method 300 for such a transportation vehicle (Kostermann et al. par. 67). The obtaining 310 of the environment information relating to the environment of the transportation vehicle comprises, for example, a sensor-based capture of the environment information relating to the environment by one or more sensors (comprising, e.g., a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor, a rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS) and/or the like). Alternatively or additionally, the obtaining 310 comprises receiving the environment information. The transportation vehicle can receive the environment information from one or more other transportation vehicles and/or a traffic infrastructure, for example, by at least one of the concepts described herein (V2V, V2I, V2X, DSRC, 3GPP) and corresponding methods or mechanisms/interfaces (Kostermann et al. par. 69).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit and the processing circuit check the plausibility base on the validation 120. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received. Also, examiner interpret the signal data obtain from the vehicle environment sensor are separate with data message receive from the other vehicle (see par. 64, 67 and 69 above).
Regarding claim 2, Kostermann et al. disclose The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sensor information from the other road user is data from surroundings sensors of the other road user.
The method 100 optionally comprises receiving information relating to a sensor type of at least one sensor with which the environment information has been determined by the other transportation vehicle. The method 100 can further comprise selecting a different sensor type on the basis of the information relating to the sensor type for comparing the environment information with the sensor data of the different sensor type (Kostermann et al. par. 57). The one or more interfaces 212 can further comprise at least one interface to a sensor of the transportation vehicle 200 to allow the data processing circuit 214 to receive sensor data from the sensor for validation (Kostermann et al. par. 65).
Regarding claim 8, Kostermann et al. disclose A system for monitoring the surroundings of a vehicle of a first road user, the system comprising; at least one signal receiver, a communication device for receiving data messages from an other road user and an evaluation circuit coupled to the at least one signal receiver and the communication device, (Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 abstract; paragraphs [0009]; [0014]-[0018]; [0025]-[0032]; [0038]-[0043]; [0056]-[0059]; [0063]-[0069]; [0080]-[0089]; figures 1-5;)
As the person skilled in the art will understand, a transmitting of the environment information by the other transportation vehicle and the receiving 110 of the environment information can be performed by different concepts and corresponding methods or mechanisms for communication between transportation vehicles. The communication (the transmitting and receiving 110) takes place, for example, via vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or car-to-car (C2C) communication, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or car-to-infrastructure (C2I) communication, vehicle-to-anything (V2X) or car-to-anything (C2X) communication. Corresponding methods or mechanisms for receiving 110 comprise, for example, an interface for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and/or for communication via the mobile radiocommunication network (for example, a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) interface, such as a PC5 interface) (Kostermann et al. par. 43). The method 100 enables the vehicles/receiver vehicles which receive the environment information with the reliability information to assess the accuracy and/or the credibility/validity/plausibility of the environment information on the basis of the reliability information. The environment information is taken into account, for example, according to a weighting based on the reliability information during a control of the receiver vehicles. The method 100 allows the receiver vehicles, for example, to weight environment information regarded as credible/valid/plausible more heavily than environment information that is regarded as not credible/valid/plausible, such as, for example, incorrect or erroneous messages/notifications. An unwanted influence of these messages/notifications can be reduced in this way (Kostermann et al. par. 56). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64). The one or more interfaces 212 can further comprise at least one interface to a sensor of the transportation vehicle 200 to allow the data processing circuit 214 to receive sensor data from the sensor for validation (Kostermann et al. par. 65).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received.
wherein the evaluation circuit is configured to receive and check a plausibility of a data message from the other road user by receiving a data message from the other user at the communication device, wherein the data message contain sensor information from the other road user;
As the person skilled in the art will understand, a transmitting of the environment information by the other transportation vehicle and the receiving 110 of the environment information can be performed by different concepts and corresponding methods or mechanisms for communication between transportation vehicles. The communication (the transmitting and receiving 110) takes place, for example, via vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or car-to-car (C2C) communication, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or car-to-infrastructure (C2I) communication, vehicle-to-anything (V2X) or car-to-anything (C2X) communication. Corresponding methods or mechanisms for receiving 110 comprise, for example, an interface for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and/or for communication via the mobile radiocommunication network (for example, a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) interface, such as a PC5 interface) (Kostermann et al. par. 43). The validation 120 of the environment information can be understood as a verification of the reliability, plausibility or credibility of the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 44). The transportation vehicle can optionally be equipped with a plurality of sensors. The sensor data can accordingly contain measurement data from a plurality of sensors. The transportation vehicle can be equipped with the at least one sensor during manufacture for autonomous driving, the sensor serving, for example, to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The sensor data can accordingly be data which serve to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The one or more sensors comprise, for example, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor and/or the like. The one or more sensors optionally comprise at least one rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS), a sensor of an airbag and/or the like. The sensor data can accordingly contain information relating to the weather and/or the road characteristic in the environment and/or relating to a speed and/or an acceleration of the transportation vehicle. The sensor data can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the environment information. The environment information can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the sensor data. The validation 120 provides, for example, a comparison of shapes, sizes and/or positions for the same object in the environment derived from the sensor data and the environment information. A simpler plausibility check can be carried out before the validation by the sensor data. Sensor data which indicate an implausible situation (e.g., a wrong-way driver on carriageways that are not structurally separated) can be disqualified for the validation and only plausible sensor data can be used for the validation. Map data of a navigation system, for example, can be used as a basis for a plausibility check of this type. A result of a plausibility check of this type can optionally be used as an input parameter for the validation with the sensor data, e.g., as a weighting and/or to adjust threshold values (Kostermann et al. par. 46). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit and the processing circuit check the plausibility base on the validation 120. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received.
receiving signals obtained at the at least one signal receiver including signals that are from the other road user and the signals being separate from the data message, checking plausibility of the data message from the other road user, wherein the plausibility check comprises a check by the evaluation circuit of the first road user to determine whether the sensor information contained in the data message corresponds to the signals received by the at least one signal receiver.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, a transmitting of the environment information by the other transportation vehicle and the receiving 110 of the environment information can be performed by different concepts and corresponding methods or mechanisms for communication between transportation vehicles. The communication (the transmitting and receiving 110) takes place, for example, via vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or car-to-car (C2C) communication, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or car-to-infrastructure (C2I) communication, vehicle-to-anything (V2X) or car-to-anything (C2X) communication. Corresponding methods or mechanisms for receiving 110 comprise, for example, an interface for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and/or for communication via the mobile radiocommunication network (for example, a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) interface, such as a PC5 interface) (Kostermann et al. par. 43). The validation 120 of the environment information can be understood as a verification of the reliability, plausibility or credibility of the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 44). The transportation vehicle can optionally be equipped with a plurality of sensors. The sensor data can accordingly contain measurement data from a plurality of sensors. The transportation vehicle can be equipped with the at least one sensor during manufacture for autonomous driving, the sensor serving, for example, to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The sensor data can accordingly be data which serve to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The one or more sensors comprise, for example, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor and/or the like. The one or more sensors optionally comprise at least one rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS), a sensor of an airbag and/or the like. The sensor data can accordingly contain information relating to the weather and/or the road characteristic in the environment and/or relating to a speed and/or an acceleration of the transportation vehicle. The sensor data can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the environment information. The environment information can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the sensor data. The validation 120 provides, for example, a comparison of shapes, sizes and/or positions for the same object in the environment derived from the sensor data and the environment information. A simpler plausibility check can be carried out before the validation by the sensor data. Sensor data which indicate an implausible situation (e.g., a wrong-way driver on carriageways that are not structurally separated) can be disqualified for the validation and only plausible sensor data can be used for the validation. Map data of a navigation system, for example, can be used as a basis for a plausibility check of this type. A result of a plausibility check of this type can optionally be used as an input parameter for the validation with the sensor data, e.g., as a weighting and/or to adjust threshold values (Kostermann et al. par. 46). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64). As described above, the environment information can be received with the reliability information, in particular by the transportation vehicle from which the environment information was transmitted for validation or which transmitted the environment information for validation. FIG. 3 shows a block diagram of a flow diagram of an example embodiment of a method 300 for such a transportation vehicle (Kostermann et al. par. 67). The obtaining 310 of the environment information relating to the environment of the transportation vehicle comprises, for example, a sensor-based capture of the environment information relating to the environment by one or more sensors (comprising, e.g., a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor, a rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS) and/or the like). Alternatively or additionally, the obtaining 310 comprises receiving the environment information. The transportation vehicle can receive the environment information from one or more other transportation vehicles and/or a traffic infrastructure, for example, by at least one of the concepts described herein (V2V, V2I, V2X, DSRC, 3GPP) and corresponding methods or mechanisms/interfaces (Kostermann et al. par. 69).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit and the processing circuit check the plausibility base on the validation 120. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received. Also, examiner interpret the signal data obtain from the vehicle environment sensor are separate with data message receive from the other vehicle (see par. 64, 67 and 69 above).
Regarding claim 12, Kostermann et al. disclose The system as claimed in claim 8, wherein the sensor information from the other road user is data from a surroundings sensors of the other road user.
The transportation vehicle can optionally be equipped with a plurality of sensors. The sensor data can accordingly contain measurement data from a plurality of sensors. The transportation vehicle can be equipped with the at least one sensor during manufacture for autonomous driving, the sensor serving, for example, to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The sensor data can accordingly be data which serve to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The one or more sensors comprise, for example, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor and/or the like. The one or more sensors optionally comprise at least one rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS), a sensor of an airbag and/or the like. The sensor data can accordingly contain information relating to the weather and/or the road characteristic in the environment and/or relating to a speed and/or an acceleration of the transportation vehicle. The sensor data can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the environment information. The environment information can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the sensor data. The validation 120 provides, for example, a comparison of shapes, sizes and/or positions for the same object in the environment derived from the sensor data and the environment information. A simpler plausibility check can be carried out before the validation by the sensor data. Sensor data which indicate an implausible situation (e.g., a wrong-way driver on carriageways that are not structurally separated) can be disqualified for the validation and only plausible sensor data can be used for the validation. Map data of a navigation system, for example, can be used as a basis for a plausibility check of this type. A result of a plausibility check of this type can optionally be used as an input parameter for the validation with the sensor data, e.g., as a weighting and/or to adjust threshold values (Kostermann et al. par. 46). The method 100 optionally comprises receiving information relating to a sensor type of at least one sensor with which the environment information has been determined by the other transportation vehicle. The method 100 can further comprise selecting a different sensor type on the basis of the information relating to the sensor type for comparing the environment information with the sensor data of the different sensor type (Kostermann et al. par. 57). The one or more interfaces 212 can further comprise at least one interface to a sensor of the transportation vehicle 200 to allow the data processing circuit 214 to receive sensor data from the sensor for validation (Kostermann et al. par. 65). The transportation vehicle 200, along with the transportation vehicle 500, receives the environment information with the message 402 using the device 210 according to the method 100 and validates the environment information to generate the reliability information. During the validation, the transportation vehicle 200 verifies, for example, the environment information in the message 402 which indicates, for example: “Wrong-way driver detected”. The environment information relating to the wrong-way driver can be confirmed or refuted by a sensor system and/or a query to a driver or front-seat passenger of the transportation vehicle 200 (Kostermann et al. par. 84).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 in view of Siemes US 20170123048.
Regarding claim 3, Kostermann et al. teach The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the signals received with the signal receiver are from an active surroundings sensor of the other road user,
The method 100 optionally comprises receiving information relating to a sensor type of at least one sensor with which the environment information has been determined by the other transportation vehicle. The method 100 can further comprise selecting a different sensor type on the basis of the information relating to the sensor type for comparing the environment information with the sensor data of the different sensor type (Kostermann et al. par. 57). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64).
According to the cited passages and figure, examiner interpret the processing circuit 214 included transmitter and receiver. For example, paragraph 64 disclose “the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information……. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information”.
Kostermann et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the active surroundings sensor has a signal transmitter and a signal receiver and wherein the reception of the signals comprises a check to determine whether the signals come from another road user.
Siemes teaches wherein the active surroundings sensor has a signal transmitter and a signal receiver and wherein the reception of the signals comprises a check to determine whether the signals come from another road user. (Siemes US 20170123048 abstract; paragraphs [0005]-[0012]; [0034]; [0039]-[0041]; [0056]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]; [0095]-[0101]; [0121]; figures 1-9;)
In some examples, a first radar signal emitted from a radar system in a first direction and reflected back to a receiver in the radar system may be used to determine a distance to a first object ‘A’ based on the time of flight or delay of the signal. If the first radar signal is reflected back from another direction, it may indicate that another object ‘B’ is present in that direction. The distance of the object ‘B’ can be determined by the time of flight of the returned signal and the time of flight to the first object ‘A’ (Siemes par. 70). A second radar signal emitted from a neighbouring radar system (object ‘C’) may also be used to map the environment. A second radar signal emitted from third object ‘C’ and received at the receiver carrying out environment mapping may indicate the direction of object ‘C’ from the receiver. If an absolute time or transmit angle information is embedded within the second radar signal, the receiver can also determine an absolute distance or relative orientation of object ‘C’ with respect to the receiver. If a reflection of the second radar signal is received from another direction, the receiver can determine that another object ‘D’ is present in that direction. The distance of object ‘D’ from the receiver may be calculated based on the delay between the reception of the second radar signal and the reception of the reflection of the second radar signal and one or more of the positions of the transmitter and/or other objects in the environment (Siemes par. 71). In some examples, the timestamp may indicate a time or flight of the signal by referring to a clock that is known to both transmitter and receiver (e.g. GPS time) and may be used to determine a distance which the signal has travelled. A transmission angle may indicate the path that the signal has travelled. The individual pattern may identify a specific transmitter and discriminate between radar signals received from different transmitters (Siemes par. 75). It will be appreciated that a vehicle 101 (or receiver system) may receive radar signals comprising embedded information from a first sender. In some cases, the vehicle 101 may be in the possession of information corresponding to the embedded information but received from sources other than a first sender. This corresponding information may have been received in radar signals from other senders and/or be information determined by sensor systems of the vehicle 101. In this case, embedded information received from the first sender may be compared to information corresponding to the embedded information from a different source (Siemes par. 95). FIG. 4 shows an example where the embedded information, received in a first radar signal, is compared with information corresponding to the embedded information but received from other sources (Siemes par. 96).
The received radar signal may be split between the two paths 710 and 720. The first path 710 may be configured to recover the information embedded in the radar signal, for example recover a V2V communication carried by the radar signal. The second path 720 may be configured to carry out a radar algorithm to map the surrounding environment of the receiver 700. It will be appreciated that the second and optionally the first paths may also be used for the reception of radar signals that were originally transmitted from the vehicle in which the receiver 700 is implemented. In other words, the receiver 700 may be closely paired with a radar transmitter as in conventional radar applications(Siemes par. 121 ).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to combine Kostermann et al. and Siemes by comprising the teaching Siemes into the method of Kostermann et al.. The motivation to combine these art is to provide the timestamp to indicate a time of flight of the signal by referring to a clock that is known to both transmitter and receiver to determine a distance which the signal has travel from Siemes reference into Kostermann et al. reference so the system can using individual transmission patterns to identify specific transmitters and discriminate between radars signals from different source as taught by Siemes reference.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes disclose The system as claimed in claim 8, wherein the signal receiver is part of an active surroundings sensor of the vehicle consisting of the signal receiver and a signal transmitter.
In some examples, a first radar signal emitted from a radar system in a first direction and reflected back to a receiver in the radar system may be used to determine a distance to a first object ‘A’ based on the time of flight or delay of the signal. If the first radar signal is reflected back from another direction, it may indicate that another object ‘B’ is present in that direction. The distance of the object ‘B’ can be determined by the time of flight of the returned signal and the time of flight to the first object ‘A’ (Siemes par. 70). A second radar signal emitted from a neighbouring radar system (object ‘C’) may also be used to map the environment. A second radar signal emitted from third object ‘C’ and received at the receiver carrying out environment mapping may indicate the direction of object ‘C’ from the receiver. If an absolute time or transmit angle information is embedded within the second radar signal, the receiver can also determine an absolute distance or relative orientation of object ‘C’ with respect to the receiver. If a reflection of the second radar signal is received from another direction, the receiver can determine that another object ‘D’ is present in that direction. The distance of object ‘D’ from the receiver may be calculated based on the delay between the reception of the second radar signal and the reception of the reflection of the second radar signal and one or more of the positions of the transmitter and/or other objects in the environment (Siemes par. 71). In some examples, the timestamp may indicate a time or flight of the signal by referring to a clock that is known to both transmitter and receiver (e.g. GPS time) and may be used to determine a distance which the signal has travelled. A transmission angle may indicate the path that the signal has travelled. The individual pattern may identify a specific transmitter and discriminate between radar signals received from different transmitters (Siemes par. 75). The received radar signal may be split between the two paths 710 and 720. The first path 710 may be configured to recover the information embedded in the radar signal, for example recover a V2V communication carried by the radar signal. The second path 720 may be configured to carry out a radar algorithm to map the surrounding environment of the receiver 700. It will be appreciated that the second and optionally the first paths may also be used for the reception of radar signals that were originally transmitted from the vehicle in which the receiver 700 is implemented. In other words, the receiver 700 may be closely paired with a radar transmitter as in conventional radar applications(Siemes par. 121 ).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes disclose The system as claimed in claim 12, wherein the signals received with the signal receiver are from an active surroundings sensor of the other road user,
The method 100 optionally comprises receiving information relating to a sensor type of at least one sensor with which the environment information has been determined by the other transportation vehicle. The method 100 can further comprise selecting a different sensor type on the basis of the information relating to the sensor type for comparing the environment information with the sensor data of the different sensor type (Kostermann et al. par. 57). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64).
According to the cited passages and figure, examiner interpret the processing circuit 214 included transmitter and receiver. For example, paragraph 64 disclose “the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information……. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information”.
wherein the active surroundings sensor has a signal transmitter and a signal receiver, and wherein the reception of the signals comprises a check to determine whether the signals come from another road user.
In some examples, a first radar signal emitted from a radar system in a first direction and reflected back to a receiver in the radar system may be used to determine a distance to a first object ‘A’ based on the time of flight or delay of the signal. If the first radar signal is reflected back from another direction, it may indicate that another object ‘B’ is present in that direction. The distance of the object ‘B’ can be determined by the time of flight of the returned signal and the time of flight to the first object ‘A’ (Siemes par. 70). A second radar signal emitted from a neighbouring radar system (object ‘C’) may also be used to map the environment. A second radar signal emitted from third object ‘C’ and received at the receiver carrying out environment mapping may indicate the direction of object ‘C’ from the receiver. If an absolute time or transmit angle information is embedded within the second radar signal, the receiver can also determine an absolute distance or relative orientation of object ‘C’ with respect to the receiver. If a reflection of the second radar signal is received from another direction, the receiver can determine that another object ‘D’ is present in that direction. The distance of object ‘D’ from the receiver may be calculated based on the delay between the reception of the second radar signal and the reception of the reflection of the second radar signal and one or more of the positions of the transmitter and/or other objects in the environment (Siemes par. 71). In some examples, the timestamp may indicate a time or flight of the signal by referring to a clock that is known to both transmitter and receiver (e.g. GPS time) and may be used to determine a distance which the signal has travelled. A transmission angle may indicate the path that the signal has travelled. The individual pattern may identify a specific transmitter and discriminate between radar signals received from different transmitters (Siemes par. 75). It will be appreciated that a vehicle 101 (or receiver system) may receive radar signals comprising embedded information from a first sender. In some cases, the vehicle 101 may be in the possession of information corresponding to the embedded information but received from sources other than a first sender. This corresponding information may have been received in radar signals from other senders and/or be information determined by sensor systems of the vehicle 101. In this case, embedded information received from the first sender may be compared to information corresponding to the embedded information from a different source (Siemes par. 95). FIG. 4 shows an example where the embedded information, received in a first radar signal, is compared with information corresponding to the embedded information but received from other sources (Siemes par. 96). The received radar signal may be split between the two paths 710 and 720. The first path 710 may be configured to recover the information embedded in the radar signal, for example recover a V2V communication carried by the radar signal. The second path 720 may be configured to carry out a radar algorithm to map the surrounding environment of the receiver 700. It will be appreciated that the second and optionally the first paths may also be used for the reception of radar signals that were originally transmitted from the vehicle in which the receiver 700 is implemented. In other words, the receiver 700 may be closely paired with a radar transmitter as in conventional radar applications(Siemes par. 121 ).
Claims 4-7 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 in view of Siemes US 20170123048 and further in view of Stinnett US 20190044629.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes teach all the limitation in the claim 3.
The combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes do not explicitly teach The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the reception of the signals comprises filtering.
Stinnett teaches The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the reception of the signals comprises filtering. (Stinnett US 20190044629 abstract; paragraphs [0007]-[0011];[0021]-[0025]; [0045]-[0050]; [0053-[0059]; [0061]-[0064]; figures 1-5;)
Now referring to FIG. 2, the diagnostic system 40 for the vehicle communications system 20 is illustrated. The diagnostic system 40 may include a diagnostic controller 42 having an RV message receiving unit, or remote message receiving unit, 44, an RV filter unit, or remote message filter unit, 48, a data determination unit 52, a message sorting unit 56, a failure determination unit 60, and a communication unit 64. The diagnostic system 40 may communicate with one or more RVs 68 (or, in some embodiments, infrastructures, pedestrians, networks, etc.) and a vehicle interface 72 (Stinnett par. 53). The RV filter unit 48 then compares the distance or range from the HV (host vehicle) to the RV (remote vehicle) to a predetermined distance threshold. For example only, the predetermined distance threshold may be 50 meters (m). If the distance or range from the HV to the RV is greater than the predetermined distance threshold, the RV filter unit 48 may discard the message (i.e., filter the message out) (Stinnet par. 59).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to combine Kostermann et al. and Siemes with Stinnett by comprising the teaching Stinnett into the method of Kostermann et al. and Siemes. The motivation to combine these art is to provide a filtering unit from Stinnett reference into Kostermann et al. and Siemes reference for enhance the system efficiency and ensure that only the relevant signal data is used in further evaluation.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the filtering comprises a comparison with the signals emitted by the vehicle.
It will be appreciated that a vehicle 101 (or receiver system) may receive radar signals comprising embedded information from a first sender. In some cases, the vehicle 101 may be in the possession of information corresponding to the embedded information but received from sources other than a first sender. This corresponding information may have been received in radar signals from other senders and/or be information determined by sensor systems of the vehicle 101. In this case, embedded information received from the first sender may be compared to information corresponding to the embedded information from a different source (Siemes par. 95). FIG. 4 shows an example where the embedded information, received in a first radar signal, is compared with information corresponding to the embedded information but received from other sources (Siemes par. 96). At step 401, the position associated with the embedded information is compared to information associated with that position from other sources. For example the vehicle 101 may receive information from radar signals from other senders and/or information from other systems, such as sensor systems, of the vehicle. This information may be associated with a position. For example, a sensor system may relay information about the road ahead and this information is associated with a position ahead of the vehicle 101. Alternatively information from radar signals from other senders may be associated with a position. The vehicle may determine whether the position associated with the embedded information from the first sender corresponds to a position associated with information from another source. If such a correspondence exists, the information from the other source and the embedded information may be compared to determine whether the information is consistent (Siemes par. 99).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The method as claimed in claim 3 wherein the reception of the signals by the signal receiver comprises a detection of the signal characteristic, signal strength and/or a temporal portion or a periodization of the signal,
The method may further include determining, by the data determination unit, the receive signal strength and a minimum receive signal strength for the remote message; comparing, by the failure determination unit, the receive signal strength with the minimum receive signal strength; incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the low receive signal strength sample messages if the receive signal strength is less than the minimum receive signal strength; and incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the total sample messages (Stinnet par. 25). The RV filter unit 48 communicates any remaining messages to the data determination unit 52. The data determination unit 52 determines or computes additional data elements such as, for example, transmit power, receive signal strength (RSS), and azimuth angle. To determine transmit power, the data determination unit 52 searches and locates the transmit power in the BSM wave short message (WSM) header in the RV message (Stinnet par. 63).
and wherein the signal characteristic is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The method as claimed in claim 6, wherein distance of the other road user is estimated from the signal characteristic,
For the sake of completeness, FIG. 1b shows the paths 121a and 121b that a second radar signal transmitted from the second vehicle 102 may take. Similarly to the first radar signal 110, the first vehicle 101 may make a determination of the position of the sender of the second radar signal 120 which is shown as vector 123 in FIG. 1c. The direction of this vector 123 may correspond to the direction of the second vehicle 102 from the first vehicle 101 and the magnitude may correspond to the distance of the second vehicle 102 from the first vehicle 101 based on the estimated time of flight of the second radar signal 120 (Siemes par. 62).
and wherein the estimated distance is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 13, wherein the reception of the signals comprises filtering.
Now referring to FIG. 2, the diagnostic system 40 for the vehicle communications system 20 is illustrated. The diagnostic system 40 may include a diagnostic controller 42 having an RV message receiving unit, or remote message receiving unit, 44, an RV filter unit, or remote message filter unit, 48, a data determination unit 52, a message sorting unit 56, a failure determination unit 60, and a communication unit 64. The diagnostic system 40 may communicate with one or more RVs 68 (or, in some embodiments, infrastructures, pedestrians, networks, etc.) and a vehicle interface 72 (Stinnett par. 53). The RV filter unit 48 then compares the distance or range from the HV (host vehicle) to the RV (remote vehicle) to a predetermined distance threshold. For example only, the predetermined distance threshold may be 50 meters (m). If the distance or range from the HV to the RV is greater than the predetermined distance threshold, the RV filter unit 48 may discard the message (i.e., filter the message out) (Stinnet par. 59).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 14, wherein the filtering comprises a comparison with the signals emitted by the vehicle.
It will be appreciated that a vehicle 101 (or receiver system) may receive radar signals comprising embedded information from a first sender. In some cases, the vehicle 101 may be in the possession of information corresponding to the embedded information but received from sources other than a first sender. This corresponding information may have been received in radar signals from other senders and/or be information determined by sensor systems of the vehicle 101. In this case, embedded information received from the first sender may be compared to information corresponding to the embedded information from a different source (Siemes par. 95). FIG. 4 shows an example where the embedded information, received in a first radar signal, is compared with information corresponding to the embedded information but received from other sources (Siemes par. 96). At step 401, the position associated with the embedded information is compared to information associated with that position from other sources. For example the vehicle 101 may receive information from radar signals from other senders and/or information from other systems, such as sensor systems, of the vehicle. This information may be associated with a position. For example, a sensor system may relay information about the road ahead and this information is associated with a position ahead of the vehicle 101. Alternatively information from radar signals from other senders may be associated with a position. The vehicle may determine whether the position associated with the embedded information from the first sender corresponds to a position associated with information from another source. If such a correspondence exists, the information from the other source and the embedded information may be compared to determine whether the information is consistent (Siemes par. 99).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 13, wherein the reception of the signals by the signal receiver comprises a detection of the signal characteristic, signal strength and/or a temporal portion or a periodization of the signal,
The method may further include determining, by the data determination unit, the receive signal strength and a minimum receive signal strength for the remote message; comparing, by the failure determination unit, the receive signal strength with the minimum receive signal strength; incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the low receive signal strength sample messages if the receive signal strength is less than the minimum receive signal strength; and incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the total sample messages (Stinnet par. 25). The RV filter unit 48 communicates any remaining messages to the data determination unit 52. The data determination unit 52 determines or computes additional data elements such as, for example, transmit power, receive signal strength (RSS), and azimuth angle. To determine transmit power, the data determination unit 52 searches and locates the transmit power in the BSM wave short message (WSM) header in the RV message (Stinnet par. 63).
and wherein the signal characteristic is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 16, wherein a distance of the other road user is estimated from the signal characteristic,
For the sake of completeness, FIG. 1b shows the paths 121a and 121b that a second radar signal transmitted from the second vehicle 102 may take. Similarly to the first radar signal 110, the first vehicle 101 may make a determination of the position of the sender of the second radar signal 120 which is shown as vector 123 in FIG. 1c. The direction of this vector 123 may correspond to the direction of the second vehicle 102 from the first vehicle 101 and the magnitude may correspond to the distance of the second vehicle 102 from the first vehicle 101 based on the estimated time of flight of the second radar signal 120 (Siemes par. 62).
and wherein the estimated distance is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 14, wherein the reception of the signals by the signal receiver comprises a detection of the signal characteristic, signal strength and/or a temporal portion or a periodization of the signal,
The method may further include determining, by the data determination unit, the receive signal strength and a minimum receive signal strength for the remote message; comparing, by the failure determination unit, the receive signal strength with the minimum receive signal strength; incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the low receive signal strength sample messages if the receive signal strength is less than the minimum receive signal strength; and incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the total sample messages (Stinnet par. 25). The RV filter unit 48 communicates any remaining messages to the data determination unit 52. The data determination unit 52 determines or computes additional data elements such as, for example, transmit power, receive signal strength (RSS), and azimuth angle. To determine transmit power, the data determination unit 52 searches and locates the transmit power in the BSM wave short message (WSM) header in the RV message (Stinnet par. 63).
and wherein the signal characteristic is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The system as claimed in claim 15, wherein the reception of the signals by the signal receiver comprises a detection of the signal characteristic, signal strength and/or a temporal portion or a periodization of the signal,
The method may further include determining, by the data determination unit, the receive signal strength and a minimum receive signal strength for the remote message; comparing, by the failure determination unit, the receive signal strength with the minimum receive signal strength; incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the low receive signal strength sample messages if the receive signal strength is less than the minimum receive signal strength; and incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the total sample messages (Stinnet par. 25). The RV filter unit 48 communicates any remaining messages to the data determination unit 52. The data determination unit 52 determines or computes additional data elements such as, for example, transmit power, receive signal strength (RSS), and azimuth angle. To determine transmit power, the data determination unit 52 searches and locates the transmit power in the BSM wave short message (WSM) header in the RV message (Stinnet par. 63).
and wherein the signal characteristic is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Kostermann et al., Siemes and Stinnett disclose The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the reception of the signals by the signal receiver comprises a detection of the signal characteristic, signal strength and/or a temporal portion or a periodization of the signal,
The method may further include determining, by the data determination unit, the receive signal strength and a minimum receive signal strength for the remote message; comparing, by the failure determination unit, the receive signal strength with the minimum receive signal strength; incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the low receive signal strength sample messages if the receive signal strength is less than the minimum receive signal strength; and incrementing, by the failure determination unit, the total sample messages (Stinnet par. 25). The RV filter unit 48 communicates any remaining messages to the data determination unit 52. The data determination unit 52 determines or computes additional data elements such as, for example, transmit power, receive signal strength (RSS), and azimuth angle. To determine transmit power, the data determination unit 52 searches and locates the transmit power in the BSM wave short message (WSM) header in the RV message (Stinnet par. 63).
and wherein the signal characteristic is compared with the sensor information from the other road user.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, this can be verified mechanically and, for example, on the basis of identical features in the sensor data and the environment information, and/or by applying a coordinate transformation to the sensor data and/or the environment information. The following, for example, can therefore be considered: the transportation vehicle 400 reports the object 510 with the shape 514 and a first position (relative to the transportation vehicle 400) via the environment information. It is then possible to determine, for example, by applying a coordinate transformation, the shape in which and the distance at which the same object 510 would have to be detected by the transportation vehicle 200 and compared, for example, with the shape 512. The sensor data from 200 can be retrieved and evaluated. It is thereby determined, for example, whether an object detection by the transportation vehicle 400 is valid. To enable such a validation or the coordinate transformation, the transportation vehicle 400 can transmit its own position to the transportation vehicle 200 with the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 89).
Claims 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 in view of Zhang et al. US 6958710.
Regarding claim 10, Kostermann et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 8.
Kostermann et al. do not explicitly teach The system as claimed in claim 8 wherein the signal receiver is an acoustic, optical and/or electromagnetic signal receiver.
Zhang et al. teach The system as claimed in claim 8 wherein the signal receiver is an acoustic, optical and/or electromagnetic signal receiver. (Zhang et al. US 6958710 abstract; col. 2 lines 34-36; col. 8 lines 27-52; col. 9 lines 33-45 figures 1-7;)
The term "receiver" as used herein means any device which acquires a signal, whether optical, acoustic, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic or otherwise manifested (Zhang et al. col. 2 lines 34-36). The provision of a memory 160 also allows vehicle data 162 concerning the vehicle 102 in which the receiver/transmitter 104 is mounted to be stored and transmitted as part of signals 118,120,122,124. This allows the system 100 to collect and evaluate information about the types of vehicles the survey participants are traveling in when they view the billboards and/or other information concerning the vehicle, such as its owner. Both of the signal receiver 150 and the signal transmitter 154 are provided with an antenna 164,166 for RF transmission. In embodiments which employ optical or acoustic transmission, appropriate transducers are used in place of antennas 164,166 (Zhang et al. col. 9 lines 33-45).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to substitute a receiver in Kostermann et al. reference with a receiver which acquires a signal, whether optical, acoustic, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic or otherwise manifested as taught by Zhang et al. reference because the receiver provide a similar function of receiving various type of signals.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostermann et al. US 20220105956 in view of Siemes US 20170123048 and further in view of Zhang et al. US 6958710.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes teach all the limitation in the claim 9.
The combination of Kostermann et al. and Siemes do not explicitly teach The system as claimed in claim 9, wherein the signal receiver is an acoustic, optical and/or electromagnetic signal receiver.
Zhang et al. teach The system as claimed in claim 9, wherein the signal receiver is an acoustic, optical and/or electromagnetic signal receiver. (Zhang et al. US 6958710 abstract; col. 2 lines 34-36; col. 8 lines 27-52; col. 9 lines 33-45 figures 1-7;)
The term "receiver" as used herein means any device which acquires a signal, whether optical, acoustic, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic or otherwise manifested (Zhang et al. col. 2 lines 34-36). The provision of a memory 160 also allows vehicle data 162 concerning the vehicle 102 in which the receiver/transmitter 104 is mounted to be stored and transmitted as part of signals 118,120,122,124. This allows the system 100 to collect and evaluate information about the types of vehicles the survey participants are traveling in when they view the billboards and/or other information concerning the vehicle, such as its owner. Both of the signal receiver 150 and the signal transmitter 154 are provided with an antenna 164,166 for RF transmission. In embodiments which employ optical or acoustic transmission, appropriate transducers are used in place of antennas 164,166 (Zhang et al. col. 9 lines 33-45).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to substitute a receiver in Kostermann et al. and Siemes reference with a receiver which acquires a signal, whether optical, acoustic, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic or otherwise manifested as taught by Zhang et al. reference because the receiver provide a similar function of receiving various type of signals.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the remark applicant argues in substance:
Applicant argument: Applicant argues that Kostermann et al. reference failed to teach or suggest “using the signal receiver to receive signals including signals that are from the other road user and the signal are separate from the data message, checking plausibility of the data message from the other road user, wherein the plausibility check comprises a check by the evaluation circuit in order to determine whether the sensor information contained in the data message corresponds to the signals received by the signal receiver.” as cited in the claim 1 and also similar in the claim 8.
Examiner response: Examiner respectfully submit that Kostermann et al. reference do teach or suggest “using the signal receiver to receive signals including signals that are from the other road user and the signal are separate from the data message, checking plausibility of the data message from the other road user, wherein the plausibility check comprises a check by the evaluation circuit in order to determine whether the sensor information contained in the data message corresponds to the signals received by the signal receiver.” as cited in the claim 1 and also similar in the claim 8 as show below.
As the person skilled in the art will understand, a transmitting of the environment information by the other transportation vehicle and the receiving 110 of the environment information can be performed by different concepts and corresponding methods or mechanisms for communication between transportation vehicles. The communication (the transmitting and receiving 110) takes place, for example, via vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) or car-to-car (C2C) communication, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or car-to-infrastructure (C2I) communication, vehicle-to-anything (V2X) or car-to-anything (C2X) communication. Corresponding methods or mechanisms for receiving 110 comprise, for example, an interface for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and/or for communication via the mobile radiocommunication network (for example, a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) interface, such as a PC5 interface) (Kostermann et al. par. 43). The validation 120 of the environment information can be understood as a verification of the reliability, plausibility or credibility of the environment information (Kostermann et al. par. 44). The transportation vehicle can optionally be equipped with a plurality of sensors. The sensor data can accordingly contain measurement data from a plurality of sensors. The transportation vehicle can be equipped with the at least one sensor during manufacture for autonomous driving, the sensor serving, for example, to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The sensor data can accordingly be data which serve to monitor the environment for autonomous driving. The one or more sensors comprise, for example, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor and/or the like. The one or more sensors optionally comprise at least one rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS), a sensor of an airbag and/or the like. The sensor data can accordingly contain information relating to the weather and/or the road characteristic in the environment and/or relating to a speed and/or an acceleration of the transportation vehicle. The sensor data can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the environment information. The environment information can optionally be processed and/or interpreted for a better comparability with the sensor data. The validation 120 provides, for example, a comparison of shapes, sizes and/or positions for the same object in the environment derived from the sensor data and the environment information. A simpler plausibility check can be carried out before the validation by the sensor data. Sensor data which indicate an implausible situation (e.g., a wrong-way driver on carriageways that are not structurally separated) can be disqualified for the validation and only plausible sensor data can be used for the validation. Map data of a navigation system, for example, can be used as a basis for a plausibility check of this type. A result of a plausibility check of this type can optionally be used as an input parameter for the validation with the sensor data, e.g., as a weighting and/or to adjust threshold values (Kostermann et al. par. 46). To carry out the method 100, the data processing circuit 214 can receive the environment information relating to an environment of the transportation vehicle 200 from another transportation vehicle via the one or more interfaces 212. According to the method, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information, as described above, for example, by sensor data and/or the user input. The data processing circuit 214 can further transmit the environment information with the reliability information via the one or more interfaces 212 (Kostermann et al. par. 64). As described above, the environment information can be received with the reliability information, in particular by the transportation vehicle from which the environment information was transmitted for validation or which transmitted the environment information for validation. FIG. 3 shows a block diagram of a flow diagram of an example embodiment of a method 300 for such a transportation vehicle (Kostermann et al. par. 67). The obtaining 310 of the environment information relating to the environment of the transportation vehicle comprises, for example, a sensor-based capture of the environment information relating to the environment by one or more sensors (comprising, e.g., a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a TOF camera, an image camera, a video camera, an ultrasound sensor, a rain sensor, a temperature sensor, a tire rotational speed sensor, a G-force sensor, a sensor of an anti-lock brake system (ABS) and/or the like). Alternatively or additionally, the obtaining 310 comprises receiving the environment information. The transportation vehicle can receive the environment information from one or more other transportation vehicles and/or a traffic infrastructure, for example, by at least one of the concepts described herein (V2V, V2I, V2X, DSRC, 3GPP) and corresponding methods or mechanisms/interfaces (Kostermann et al. par. 69).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret data processing circuit as an evaluation circuit and the processing circuit check the plausibility base on the validation 120. For example, the data processing circuit 214 can further validate the environment information to generate reliability information relating to the environment information as received. Also, examiner interpret the signal data obtain from the vehicle environment sensor are separate with data message receive from the other vehicle (see par. 64, 67 and 69 above).
According to the Kostermann et al. reference paragraphs 43 and 69 clearly teach about V2V communication, paragraphs 41, 46 and 69 teach about vehicle sensor for detecting surrounding environment of the vehicle and paragraph 44, 46, 51, 56, 71, 86, 89 and 94 for checking the credibility/validity/plausibility or the environment information in the validation. Examiner interpret the signal data obtain from the vehicle environment sensors are separate with the reliability data information receive from the other vehicle via V2V communication (see paragraphs 43-48, 63, 64 and 69 and figures 1 and 3). Since art of record still read on the claim invention, therefore the rejection stand. Please see above rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANG D TRAN whose telephone number is (408)918-7546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:30 pm (pacific time).
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, Brian A Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/THANG D TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2686
/BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2686