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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Based upon consideration of all of the relevant factors with respect to the claims as a whole, claims 1-10 are held to claim an unpatentable abstract idea, and are therefore rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The limitations of the independent claims of (for claims 1 and 9) generate matching information indicating that periphery information and the map information match each other when a difference between the periphery information and the map information is within an allowable range; not to generate information indicating that the periphery information and the map information do not match when the difference is out of the allowable range; transmit the matching information; and receive new map information; update the map information when the new map information is received; and (for claim 10) communicating with in-vehicle devices; statistically process pieces of matching information, and to calculate reliability indicating certainty of the map information when the matching information is received from the in-vehicle devices; determine whether to update the map information using the reliability; transmit updated map information to the in-vehicle device when the map information is updated, wherein the matching information includes information generated when a difference between periphery information and the map information is within an allowable range and indicating that the periphery information matches the map information; a generation time point; and position information covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting the application of the steps by a generic sensor and processor, nothing is being recited that could not be performed mentally. The entire system is run either by generic software or generic computer processors such as a server where all the steps can be done mentally and are simply being applied on a generic computer. The new steps do not add anything beyond the mental steps of determining a difference and generating matching information.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the ‘Mental Processes’ grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the element of a unit to perform the listed steps. The units in all steps is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Moreover, it is important to note that the claims recite matching information “which is detected by a periphery detection sensor mounted on the vehicle,” however this step is not positively recited. This means that matching information generation is a positive step of the claim, but this feature only uses data that was detected by sensors, not that the claim encompasses the sensors actively detecting the periphery. If this step were to be positively recited, this would trigger a separate analysis in Step 2B as to whether sensors acquiring information are well-understood, routine, and conventional, but as written, this analysis is not currently required.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a server unit to perform the listed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Turning to the dependent claims, the dependent claims merely define pieces of data or recite steps that can be performed mentally (i.e. acquiring data, combining the data, determining a difference, and make reliability calculations). For claim 11, vehicle control is very broad and could be simply displaying map information.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Naserian US20230133131, filing date 11/29/2021.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 11, Naserian discloses a map information system configured to manage map information stored in a storage unit in a vehicle (Abstract discloses method for capturing, by a host vehicle camera, an image of a leading vehicle, estimating a leading vehicle dimension and a first distance between a host vehicle and the leading vehicle in response to the image, receiving a data indicative of a traffic signal location and a traffic signal cycle state, determining a second distance between the host vehicle and the traffic signal, estimating a traffic signal view obstruction in response to the leading vehicle dimension, the first distance, and the second distance, and generating a graphical user interface indicative of the traffic signal cycle state in response to the traffic signal view obstruction) comprising:
a periphery detection sensor mounted on the vehicle and configured to detect periphery information, the periphery information comprising information of objects existing in a periphery of the vehicle (P25 discloses a vehicle control system including a global positioning system configured for receiving a location data indicative of a host vehicle location, a host vehicle sensor for detecting a leading vehicle dimension and a first distance between a host vehicle and the leading vehicle, a receiver configured to receive a traffic signal data indicative of a traffic signal location and a traffic signal cycle state, a processor configured to determine a traffic signal view obstruction between the host vehicle and a traffic signal in response to the host vehicle location, the first distance, the traffic signal location and the leading vehicle dimension, and a display configured to display a representation of the traffic signal in response to the determination of the traffic signal view obstruction and the traffic signal cycle state); and
at least one of a circuit and a processor (See P25) to:
to generate matching information indicating that periphery information, which is detected by a periphery detection sensor mounted on the vehicle, and the map information match each other when a difference between the periphery information and the map information is within an allowable range (See below); and
not to generate difference information indicating that the periphery information and the map information do not match when the difference is out of the allowable range (See below).
P3 discloses that using signal phase and timing (SPaT) messaging enables traffic signal controllers to provide additional information to proximate vehicles, such as current light states for each lane of an intersection and time to state change for the lights. This information allows the vehicle to provide additional information and warnings to the driver about conditions that may not be readily apparent. P9 discloses a memory for storing a map data indicative of a traffic signal location. P12 discloses a lidar configured to capture a depth map indicative of the leading vehicle dimension and the first distance. P48 then discloses that the system may generate a driver alert to be provided to the driver alert system 235, the driver information center 230 and/or the AR HUD 225. The driver alert system 235 may be configured to provide an alert to a vehicle operation that the threshold distance to the first vehicle will be soon reached and therefore views to the traffic signal may be obstructed. For example, the driver alert may be a flashing traffic signal graphic or the like. P60 then discloses the processor 530 may next determine a second distance between the host vehicle and the traffic signal in response to a map data or the like. The processor 530 may then estimate a traffic signal view obstruction in response to the leading vehicle dimension, the first distance, and the second distance. The traffic signal view obstruction may be indicative of the leading vehicle obstructing a line of sight between a host vehicle operator or host vehicle sensor and the traffic signal. For example, the traffic signal view obstruction may be estimated in response to a height of the leading vehicle being within a line of sight between the host vehicle and the traffic signal. The processor 530 may then generate a graphical user interface in response to the traffic signal view obstruction.
This is further shown in Fig. 3.
Summary: the driver alert system makes a determination based on the distance between the vehicle and the traffic light is within a threshold distance and is obstructed by another vehicle that a traffic light signal is put on the map and displayed to a user. If these threshold conditions are not met, then there is no match, and the traffic light signal is not placed on the map. Note that for both the position of the target feature in the periphery is the same distance away as it is in the map. This means that the traffic signal is within a threshold distance from the car in the periphery, as well as that same threshold distance on the map.
the difference between the periphery information and the map information is a difference in a position of a target feature in the periphery information and the position of the target feature in the map information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range);
determine that the difference between the periphery information and the map information is within the allowable range when an amount of the difference between the positions of the target feature is less than an allowable amount, and to generate matching information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range).
Note that for both the position of the target feature in the periphery is the same distance away as it is in the map. This means that the traffic signal is within a threshold distance from the car in the periphery, as well as that same threshold distance on the map.
For the additional limitations of claim 9:
a vehicle communication unit configured to communicate with a management server, to transmit the matching information to the management server, and to receive new map information from the management server (P7 discloses that the steps are done by a processor, which is equivalent to a server. As discussed above, at least P48 discloses that the map is updated in real-time based on determining that a distance is approaching a minimum distance. This means data has to be communicated to and from the processor, and new map information is constantly updated); and
a map update unit configured to update the map information in the storage unit when the new map information is received from the management server (see limitation above).
For claim 11: a map update or display is vehicle control.
Regarding claims 3, Naserian further discloses the map information includes sign information for specifying a type of at least one of a road sign (As above, this is a traffic light), the periphery information includes the sign information (the traffic light), and (the information generation unit is configured to determine that the difference between the periphery information and the map information is within the allowable range when a type specified by the sign information of the periphery information and a type specified by the sign information of the map information match each other, and to generate the matching information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range).
Regarding claim 4, Naserian discloses the map information includes traffic light information for specifying a traffic light (see above), and the information generation unit is configured to specify one traffic light closest in a traveling direction of the vehicle among traffic lights by using positions of the traffic lights with respect to the vehicle and an orientation of the vehicle (See P48, P60, and Fig. 3); and determine that the difference between the periphery information and the map information is within the allowable range when the specified traffic light matches a traffic light included in the traffic light information, and to generate the matching information (See Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Naserian discloses the information generation unit is configured to stop generation of matching information when an in-vehicle system mounted on the vehicle outputs abnormality information indicating an abnormality (As discussed above, the traffic light is not presented all the time – just when certain threshold conditions are met, which are distances. When the in-vehicle system does not generate this information, the matching information on the map is not generated. This is considered abnormality).
Regarding claim 8, Naserian discloses the matching information includes operation information indicating an execution status of vehicle control of a vehicle controller configured to control behavior of the vehicle (Fig. 3 shows the car moving).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naserian in view of Koda US20190316915A1, hereinafter “Koda”.
Regarding claim 10 (and claim 7), Naserian discloses a management server configured to communicate with an in-vehicle device mounted on vehicles and to manage map information stored in a storage unit of the in-vehicle device (Abstract discloses method for capturing, by a host vehicle camera, an image of a leading vehicle, estimating a leading vehicle dimension and a first distance between a host vehicle and the leading vehicle in response to the image, receiving a data indicative of a traffic signal location and a traffic signal cycle state, determining a second distance between the host vehicle and the traffic signal, estimating a traffic signal view obstruction in response to the leading vehicle dimension, the first distance, and the second distance, and generating a graphical user interface indicative of the traffic signal cycle state in response to the traffic signal view obstruction) comprising:
a server communication unit configured to communicate with in-vehicle devices (P7 discloses that the steps are done by a processor, which is equivalent to a server);
a control unit configured to control the server communication unit to transmit updated map information to the in-vehicle device when the map information is updated (P7 discloses that the steps are done by a processor, which is equivalent to a server. As discussed above, at least P48 discloses that the map is updated in real-time based on determining that a distance is approaching a minimum distance. This means data has to be communicated to and from the processor, and new map information is constantly updated);
the matching information includes:
information generated when a difference between periphery information, which is detected by a periphery detection sensor mounted on the vehicle and the map information, and the map information is within an allowable range and indicating that the periphery information matches the map information (see rejection to claim 1);
a generation time point when the matching information is generated (P49 discloses a countdown timer and upcoming time); and
position information indicating a position of the vehicle when the matching information is generated (see rejection to claim 1 for discussion of distances);
the difference between the periphery information and the map information is a difference in a position of a target feature in the periphery information and the position of the target feature in the map information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range);
determine that the difference between the periphery information and the map information is within the allowable range when an amount of the difference between the positions of the target feature is less than an allowable amount, and to generate matching information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range).
Naserian does not teach:
a reliability calculation unit configured to statistically process pieces of matching information, and to calculate reliability indicating certainty of the map information when the matching information is received from the in-vehicle devices; and
an update determination unit configured to determine whether to update the map information using the reliability.
However, Koda, which based on the Abstract is directed to a server device 4 stores on a storage unit 42 an advanced map database 43 which includes feature information associated with a feature. The server device 4 receives, from vehicle mounted devices 1 equipped with external sensors 31 which measure features, difference information Idf indicative of a difference between feature information and the actual feature corresponding to the feature information. In accordance with the degree of reliability Rdf which is calculated based on a plurality of the difference information Idf, the server device 4 sends to the vehicle mounted device 1 a raw data request signal SR for requesting the transmission of raw data which is measurement data of the actual feature, does disclose:
a reliability calculation unit configured to statistically process pieces of matching information, and to calculate reliability indicating certainty of the map information when the matching information is received from the in-vehicle devices (Claim 1 discloses a receiving unit configured to receive, from moving bodies equipped with measurement devices which measure features, difference information indicative of a difference between the feature information and the real feature corresponding to the feature information; and a request unit configured to request, on a basis of degree of reliability calculated based on the difference information, the moving bodies or another moving body to send measurement data of the real feature); and
an update determination unit configured to determine whether to update the map information using the reliability (Claim 3 discloses an update unit configured to update the feature information in cases that the degree of the reliability exceeds an upper limit value while not updating the feature information in cases that the degree of the reliability is lower than a lower limit value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Naserian to include the reliability calculations of Koda to provide a more accurate updated map, which is what autonomous driving is based on.
Please Note: the citations and obviousness rationale for claim 10 apply to claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
The two closest pieces of prior art above do not teach the limitations of claim 5.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 101:
Applicant’s arguments are fully considered but are deemed not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant cites various portions of the Specification to show how the mounted sensor could work, but none of this is claimed. The arguments for Prong II and Step 2B also focus entirely on unclaimed portions of the Specification.
Prior Art:
Applicant’s arguments are fully considered but are deemed unpersuasive. Naserian teaches:
the difference between the periphery information and the map information is a difference in a position of a target feature in the periphery information and the position of the target feature in the map information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range);
determine that the difference between the periphery information and the map information is within the allowable range when an amount of the difference between the positions of the target feature is less than an allowable amount, and to generate matching information (As discussed above, at least P7, P14, P60, and P62 disclose that the traffic signal is displayed on the map when the position of the target feature, which is the traffic light, and the position of the vehicle itself with the map, are within an allowable range).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ARYAN E WEISENFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6602. 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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 5712721206. 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.
ARYAN E. WEISENFELD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3689
/ARYAN E WEISENFELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights