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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “very conversion period” should be corrected to “every conversion period”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the claim as written is not clear. Claim 4 recites setting the same reference position between a plurality of the local map data and the reference positions which are divided and transmitted in a plurality of the map transmission periods. It is unclear whether the applicant mean the reference position for a plurality of the local map data is the same as the reference positions transmitted in a plurality of the map transmission period; It is unclear if the reference positions (in plural) transmitted in a plurality of the map transmission period are the same to each other, the same to the first reference position used in the recited claim or the same to both. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the examiner, the claimed limitation is interpreted as setting fixed/same reference position for all of the local map data and in different point in times (transmission periods).
Regarding claim 5, the claim as written is not clear. Claim 5 recites setting the same reference position between the local map data and the reference positions of the differential areas which are transmitted in the present and past map transmission periods. It is unclear if the applicant means the relative position between the local map data and the differential areas is the same or the reference position for both the map data and the differential area in present and past transmission period stays the same. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of examiner, claim 5 is interpreted as setting the same reference positions between the local map data and the differential area, i.e. the differential area will set according the same reference position as the areas transmitted in the present and past map transmission period.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-7, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikamori et al., US 20220219723 A1, hereinafter “Chikamori”, in view of Juick, WO 2022264731 A1, hereinafter “Juick”, or in alternative rejection, in view of Bakker et al, US 20240263961 A1, hereinafter “Bakker”, further in view of Komiyama et al., US20240126532, hereinafter “Komiyama” .
Regarding claim 1, Chikamori discloses:
A vehicle system comprising at least one processor configured to implement (at least Abstract, [0001], [0004]):
a position acquisitor that acquires position information of an ego vehicle ([0046], “an own vehicle position identifying unit”) and transmits the position information of the ego vehicle for every position transmission period ([0003], [0005], [0063]);
a local map generator that generates local map data of a peripheral area of a position of the ego vehicle, based on the position information of the ego vehicle received from the position acquisitor, and map data (Abstract), [0005], “creates local map data based on high accuracy map data and a position of an own vehicle by extracting data of regions near the own vehicle from the high accuracy map data”; and transmits the local map data for every map transmission period (Abstract, [0056], [0063], Claim 1);
a vehicle controller that calculates a vehicle control amount which controls a traveling of the ego vehicle, using the position in the ego vehicle coordinate system of the local map data (Abstract, “an autonomous driving control unit that creates a travel plan for autonomous traveling of the own vehicle based on the local map data and controls traveling of the own vehicle according to the travel plan.”, [0003], [0005], [0057], [0063], Claim 1, __also according to at least paragraphs [0037]-[0038] of Chikamori, the driving operation sensor detects an operation amount of operation input member such as a steering wheel , a brake pedal which reads on calculating a vehicle control amount__, and Fig. 1),
Chikamori doesn’t disclose calculates relative positions on a basis of a reference position, as position information included in the local map data; and transmits the local map data and the reference position for every map transmission period; a coordinate converter that converts the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data received from the local map generator into positions in an ego vehicle coordinate system on a basis of the position of the ego vehicle, based on the newest position information of the ego vehicle received from the position acquisitor, for very conversion period; and wherein the conversion period is longer than the position transmission period, and shorter than the map transmission period.
However, Juick teaches
calculates relative positions on a basis of a reference position, as position information included in the local map data ([0021], “The relative position of the target in the target information is a position relative to the position of the roadside unit 3 as a reference.”, [0197], “The reference position indicates the location of a geographic point”); and transmits the local map data and the reference position for every map transmission period ([0008]);
a coordinate converter that converts the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data received from the local map generator into positions in an ego vehicle coordinate system on a basis of the position of the ego vehicle, based on the newest position information of the ego vehicle received from the position acquisitor, for very conversion period ([0038], [0264]-[0266]);
Further, in alternative rejection Bakker also teaches,
a coordinate converter that converts the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data received from the local map generator into positions in an ego vehicle coordinate system on a basis of the position of the ego vehicle, based on the newest position information of the ego vehicle received from the position acquisitor, for very conversion period (at least Bakker teaches processing of transforming the position of locations of the object of interest in the map to a reference frame e.g. coordinate systems associated with the vehicle which reads on the process of coordinate converter as recited in the claim__, [0051], [0253], “adjusts the position e.g. coordinates of the object to the common coordinate system as used in the vehicle. Thus, the position of the map object is transformed from the map reference frame to the vehicle reference frame.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by Chikamori, with converting the relative position of the map data into the coordinate position of the ego vehicle, as taught by Juick (or Bakker, in alternative rejection), with the motivation of, reducing/optimizing the calculation/processing load and improving the accuracy of vehicle control.
Further, Modified Chikamori doesn’t teaches wherein the conversion period is longer than the position transmission period, and shorter than the map transmission period.
However, Komiyama teaches transmitting the data at different frequencies (different period) and teaches
wherein the conversion period is longer than the position transmission period, and shorter than the map transmission period (According to paragraph [0040] of Komiyama, it is disclosed that the vehicle data which changes largely in a short time (e.g., vehicle speed) is desirably transmitted with a high frequency (shorter transmission period), and vehicle data that does not change much in a short time, does not need to be transmitted with a high frequency. This results in reducing data amount and communication overhead, according to paragraph [0312] of Komiyama. Further, according to paragraph [0311], it is disclosed that “an appropriate transmission cycle is determined based on the type of vehicle data. That is, the transmission cycle of the vehicle data with a high update frequency is set to be shorter than the transmission cycle of the vehicle data with a low update frequency. As a result, the amount of transmission data can be reduced as much as possible.”, also see [0308]-[0313].
As a person of ordinary skills in the art knows and also according to, for example, paragraph [0040] of the specification of the instant application, position transmission is a time-variant data according to the movement of the ego vehicle that changes in a short time and obviously needs to be transmitted with a higher frequency (with short period), on the other hand the conversion period needs the newest information of the movement of ego vehicle, but requires much data amount to be converted, therefore, the longer transmission period is set for the conversion period. Finally, map transmission period is time-invariant (no change in short time), therefore, the map transmission period can be set longer compare to the other two data transmission.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by Chikamori with setting the transmission cycle of the data related to vehicle (also map data) with a high update frequency to be shorter than the transmission cycle of the vehicle data with a low update frequency (which meets the claimed limitation as explained in paragraph 17 and 18 of the present office action), as taught according to at least paragraph [0311] of Komiyama, with the reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce the amount of transmission data as much as possible.
Regarding claim 2, Chikamori teaches the vehicle system according to claim 1,
wherein the local map generator divides the local map data and the reference position to transmit for the every map transmission period ([0005], [0059]).
Regarding claim 6, Chikamori teaches The vehicle system according to claim 1, wherein the local map generator changes a range of the peripheral area where each type of data included in the local map data or the local map data is generated ([0067], “the map providing unit 58 changes the area of the region on the map corresponding to each piece of transmission data based on the road traffic information.”, [0082]-[0084], “the map providing unit 58 may transmit pieces of transmission data corresponding to only some of the multiple parallel lanes to the autonomous driving control unit 32.” And [0086] Figs. 5A and 5B.).
Regarding claim 7, Chikamori teaches The vehicle system according to claim 1, wherein the local map generator changes a range of the peripheral area where each type of data included in the local map data or the local map data is generated, according to at least one of a type of map data included in the local map data, a speed of the ego vehicle, and a road type ([0082]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 8 and 9, Modified Chikamori teaches the vehicle system according to claim 1, however, Chikamori doesn’t disclose wherein the local map generator changes the map transmission period of each type of map data included in the local map data, or the map transmission period of the local map data, according to at least one of a type of map data included in the local map data, a speed of the ego vehicle, and a road type.
Although, Komiyama teaches transmitting the data in different period according to the type of data as mentioned in the rejection of the corresponding limitation in claim 1 (Please, see Paragraphs 17-19 in the present Office Action), but, for the purpose of compact prosecution, Shiraki also teaches US20090212934 wherein the local map generator changes the map transmission period of each type of map data included in the local map data, or the map transmission period of the local map data, according to at least one of a type of map data included in the local map data, a speed of the ego vehicle, and a road type. (at least [0041], “Based on the vehicle speed, the controller 16 calculates an optimum transmission period.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by modified Chikamori with changing the map transmission period according to the type of data as taught by Komiyama or Shiraki, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of reducing the amount of data for transmission which results in optimizing the processing load.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikamori, in view of Juick (or in alternative rejection, in view of Bakker), further in view of Komiyama, and further in view of Schechter, DE102020102751A1, hereinafter “Schechter”, further in view of Bakker.
Regarding claim 3, Modified Chikami teaches the vehicle system according to claim 1, however, it doesn’t teach wherein, in the present map transmission period, the local map generator transmits the local map data and the reference position of a differential area which is not included in an area of the local map data transmitted in the past map transmission periods among the peripheral area of the position of the ego vehicle, and wherein the coordinate converter converts the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data transmitted in the newest map transmission period, and the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data transmitted in the past map transmission periods, into the positions in the ego vehicle coordinate system.
Schechter teaches,
wherein, in the present map transmission period, the local map generator transmits the local map data and the reference position of a differential area which is not included in an area of the local map data transmitted in the past map transmission periods among the peripheral area of the position of the ego vehicle (at least [0004] “only map data that covers a relevant geographical area around the vehicle should be kept up to date.”, [0007], “determining that the first area has been shifted such that its center point leaves a third area determined with respect to the second area; and re-updating map data of the second area.”, [0012], “the update takes place only in a section of the second area that has been newly incorporated into the second area by the shift”, [0040], “The first reference point 225, located in the old section 245, can be discarded or retained until it is no longer considered current.”, Figs. 2a-2c and associated paragraphs __the newly incorporated area of the second area by the shift as recited in the reference reads on differential area__)
Bakker teaches,
and wherein the coordinate converter converts the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data transmitted in the newest map transmission period, and the relative positions on the basis of the reference position included in the local map data transmitted in the past map transmission periods, into the positions in the ego vehicle coordinate system (Bakker teaches processing of transforming the position of locations of the object of interest in the map to a reference frame e.g. coordinate systems associated with the vehicle which reads on the process of coordinate converter as recited in the claim__, at least [0051], “determine a difference in the absolute position of the reference location (i.e. displacement) between a reference time and any future time of interest (or indeed a past time of interest).”, [0081]-[0084], [0114]-[0123], [0126], [0234], [0253], “adjusts the position e.g. coordinates of the object to the common coordinate system as used in the vehicle. Thus, the position of the map object is transformed from the map reference frame to the vehicle reference frame.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by modified Chikamori with transferring the information of the detected area which is not included in the past transmission period (differential area) as taught by Schechter, and converting the relative position of the map data into the coordinate position of the ego vehicle, as taught by Bakker, with the motivation of, reducing/optimizing the calculation/processing load and improving the accuracy of vehicle control.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikamori, in view of Juick (or in alternative rejection, in view of Bakker), further in view of Komiyama, and further in view of, Katoh US20150298621, hereinafter “Katoh”.
Regarding claim 4, Modified Chikamori teaches the vehicle system according to claim 2, however, it doesn’t teach wherein the local map generator sets the same reference position between a plurality of the local map data and the reference positions which are divided and transmitted in a plurality of the map transmission periods.
Nevertheless, Katoh teaches,
wherein the local map generator sets the same reference position between a plurality of the local map data (at least Abstract, “sets the position of the fixed object as a reference point; and calculates movement information of the target object from the position of the target object with the reference point as a reference.”, [0008]-[0009])
and the reference positions which are divided and transmitted in a plurality of the map transmission periods (__under the examiner’s BRI, the claimed limitation is interpreted as setting the same/fixed reference position in all of the map transmission period__ at least paragraph [0010] of Kotah reaches setting the same reference point at different points in time, “the movement information of the target object can be calculated from changes in position of the target object acquired at different points in time with the reference point (the position of the fixed object) as the reference”, [0052], “transmits [] information for each object (each target object) in a case where an object exists, to the system ECU 30 [] for each constant time.”, [0053], [0064]-[0065], [0079]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by modified Chikamori with setting/transmitting the same/fixed reference position for all of the map data and in all of the plurality of the map transmission period as taught by Kotah, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of reducing the calculation load and improving the vehicle system for processing and updating map information and improving the accuracy of vehicle control while reducing the transmission or processing load of the local map data.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikamori, in view of Juick (or in alternative rejection, in view of Bakker), further in view of Komiyama, and further in view of Schechter and Bakker, further in view of Katoh.
Regarding claim 5, modified Chikamori teaches the vehicle system according to claim 3, however, it doesn’t teach wherein the local map generator sets the same reference position between the local map data and the reference positions of a plurality of the differential areas which are transmitted in the present and past map transmission periods wherein the local map generator sets the same reference position between the local map data.
Kotah teaches,
wherein the local map generator sets the same reference position between the local map data (at least Abstract, “sets the position of the fixed object as a reference point; and calculates movement information of the target object from the position of the target object with the reference point as a reference.”, [0008]-[0009])
Schechter teaches,
and the reference positions of a plurality of the differential areas which are transmitted in the present and past map transmission periods (__under the Examiner’s BRI, the claimed invention is interpreted as all the plurality of differential areas has the same reference position__, Schechter, “areas 205 and 210 have the same shapes and/or aspect ratios and are centered in their initial position relative to each other as shown.”, [0034], “The third area 215 is also exemplary, having the same shape and aspect ratio as the first area 205.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by modified Chikamori with setting the same/fixed reference position for all of the map data as taught by Kotah, and setting the same reference position for all the plurality of the differential area which are transmitted in the present and past transmission period as taught by Schechter, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of reducing the calculation load.
Claim(s) 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikamori, in view of Juick (or in alternative rejection, in view of Bakker), further in view of Komiyama, and further in view of Bande US 20220230019 A1, hereinafter “Bande”.
Regarding claim 10 and 11, Modified Chikamori teaches the vehicle system according to claim 1, however, it doesn’t teach wherein the coordinate converter changes the conversion period of each type of map data included in the local map data, according to the type of map data included in the local map data.
Nevertheless, Bande teaches
wherein the coordinate converter changes the conversion period of each type of map data included in the local map data, according to the type of map data included in the local map data (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the examiner, changing conversion period refers to converting the coordinate system according to the type of map data to a reference/anchor coordinate system. Bande discloses using an anchor coordinate system and a trigger event (which causes recalculation/reset of coordinate system). A trigger event which causes the conversion of coordinate system of a local map feature can be based on local map features like lane boundaries which meets the claimed limitation. Further, “uncertainty value” also triggers a change in coordinate system. __ [0003], “With each new anchor frame, parameter values for lane boundary estimates (known as lane boundary states) can be recalculated with respect to the new anchor frame”, [0004], [0021]-[0022], [0033]- [0036], Fig. 9, [0048], [0050]-[0051], __Further, according to [0054]-[0055] of Bande, road slope (a local map data), affects the calculation/ changing the coordinate system, which reads on the limitation__).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle system as taught by modified Chikamori with changing the conversion period of map data (changing/converting the coordinate system associated with the map data) according to the type of map data as taught by Bande, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of, reducing/optimizing the calculation/processing load.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAJAR HASSANIARDEKANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8 am-5 pm ET.
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, Erin Piateski can be reached at 5712707429. 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.
/H.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669