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 .
1. This action is responsive to restriction election received May 14, 2026. Claims 1-3, 7-11 and 15-20 were elected without traverse. Restriction is made FINAL.
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.
2. 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 limitations are: “acquiring unit” and “control unit” in claim 1.
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 § 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)(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.
3. Claims 1-3, 7, 10-11 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Neubecker et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0073909 (referred to hereafter as Neubecker).
As to claims 1 and 19-20, Neubecker teaches a traffic flow control apparatus, method and medium comprising:
a communication unit; an acquiring unit that acquires information related to a first controlled vehicle that communicates with the communication unit, information related to a following vehicle that travels between the first controlled vehicle and a second controlled vehicle that travels behind the first controlled vehicle and communicates with the communication unit, and information related to a forward object that is positioned ahead of the first controlled vehicle (see para. 41-42, and 35); and
a control unit that causes the first controlled vehicle to behave based on energy consumption of the first controlled vehicle and of the following vehicle in relation to behavior of the first controlled vehicle, the energy consumption being acquired from the information related to the first controlled vehicle, the information related to the following vehicle, and the information related to the forward object (see para. 43-44, 54 and 46).
As to claim 2, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the control unit causes the first controlled vehicle to behave so that a sum of the energy consumption of the first controlled vehicle and of the following vehicle in relation to the behavior of the first controlled vehicle is minimized (see para. 43-44, 54 and 46).
As to claim 3, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the communication unit, the acquiring unit, and the control unit are disposed in a different location from the first controlled vehicle, the second controlled vehicle, and the following vehicle (see para. 35).
As to claim 7, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the behavior of the first controlled vehicle based on energy consumption of the first controlled vehicle and of the following vehicle in relation to the behavior of the first controlled vehicle is deceleration (see para. 46).
As to claim 10, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the information related to the following vehicle includes a type of the following vehicle (see para. 43-44, 54 and 46).
As to claim 11, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 2, wherein: the communication unit, the acquiring unit, and the control unit are disposed in a different location from the first controlled vehicle, the second controlled vehicle, and the following vehicle (see para. 35).
As to claim 18, Neubecker teaches the traffic flow control apparatus according to claim 2, wherein: the information related to the following vehicle includes a type of the following vehicle (see para. 31-32 and 35).
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.
4. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neubecker in view of Kleinau et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0319400 (referred to hereafter as Kleinau).
Neubecker teaches a traffic flow control apparatus, method and medium comprising:
a communication unit; an acquiring unit that acquires information related to a first controlled vehicle that communicates with the communication unit, information related to a following vehicle that travels between the first controlled vehicle and a second controlled vehicle that travels behind the first controlled vehicle and communicates with the communication unit, and information related to a forward object that is positioned ahead of the first controlled vehicle (see para. 41-42, and 35); and
a control unit that causes the first controlled vehicle to behave based on energy consumption of the first controlled vehicle and of the following vehicle in relation to behavior of the first controlled vehicle, the energy consumption being acquired from the information related to the first controlled vehicle, the information related to the following vehicle, and the information related to the forward object (see para. 43-44, 54 and 46).
Neubecker does not explicitly teach that the forward object is a traffic light. However, Kleinau teaches a system and method for controlling a convoy based on a forward object wherein the forward object is a traffic light (see para. 58-60).
It would have been obvious for one of the ordinary skill in the at the effective filling data of the application to control the convoy of Neubecker with respect to a traffic light as taught by Kleinau. Motivation to do so comes from the teachings of Kleinau that doing so would in vehicles stopping at a traffic light or pass through the light in an energy efficient way.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 9 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUSSEIN A EL CHANTI whose telephone number is (571)272-3999. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at 571-272-7691. 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.
/HUSSEIN ELCHANTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights