DETAILED ACTION
This is a first action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims dated 08/12/2024 are being examined.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/13/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informality: “the leading vehicle” is suggested to should be introduced as “the leading golf vehicle” for consistency.
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 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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ferone (US-20240140425-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Ferone.
Regarding claim 20, Ferone teaches a vehicle following system comprising ([0027] the system controls the following vehicle to follow the lead vehicle without a physical connection to the lead vehicle. In this way, the system improves the process of hitchless towing between a lead vehicle and following vehicle):
a following vehicle including (FIG. 1 vehicle 100; FIG. 4 following vehicle 410):
a driveline including a prime mover (FIG. 1 propulsion system 141), a braking system (FIG. 1 braking system 142), and a steering system (FIG. 1 steering system 143);
a communications interface; and ([0088] The processor(s) 110, the hitching system 170, and/or the autonomous driving module(s) 160 can be operatively connected to communicate with the various vehicle systems 140 and/or individual components thereof)
a sensor system including one or more sensors configured to acquire second data; and (FIG. 1 sensor system 120)
at least one processing circuit having at least one processor and at least one memory, the at least one memory storing instructions thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to (FIG. 1 processor(s) 110; [0010] The system includes one or more processors and a memory communicably coupled to the one or more processors)
receive a request for the following vehicle to follow a leading vehicle; and (FIG. 3 310; [0020] As an example, the handshake process, in one arrangement, includes receiving a request from the lead vehicle or the following vehicle, where the request is generated from, for example, a human machine interface (HMI) (e.g., a display within the lead or following vehicle))
control the driveline such that the following vehicle follows the leading vehicle within a specified distance (FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle)
based on at least one of (a) first data acquired from at least one of the communications interface or from a global positioning system (GPS) ([0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link)
or (b) the second data acquired by the sensor system ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.).
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 12-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferone, in view of Lin et al. (US-20190001977-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Lin.
Regarding claim 1, Ferone teaches a […] vehicle following system comprising ([0027] the system controls the following vehicle to follow the lead vehicle without a physical connection to the lead vehicle. In this way, the system improves the process of hitchless towing between a lead vehicle and following vehicle):
a following […] vehicle including (FIG. 1 vehicle 100; FIG. 4 following vehicle 410):
a driveline including a prime mover (FIG. 1 propulsion system 141), a braking system (FIG. 1 braking system 142), and a steering system (FIG. 1 steering system 143);
a communications interface; and ([0088] The processor(s) 110, the hitching system 170, and/or the autonomous driving module(s) 160 can be operatively connected to communicate with the various vehicle systems 140 and/or individual components thereof)
a sensor system including one or more sensors configured to acquire second data; and (FIG. 1 sensor system 120)
at least one processing circuit having at least one processor and at least one memory, the at least one memory storing instructions thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to (FIG. 1 processor(s) 110; [0010] The system includes one or more processors and a memory communicably coupled to the one or more processors)
receive a request for the following golf vehicle to follow a leading golf vehicle; and (FIG. 3 310; [0020] As an example, the handshake process, in one arrangement, includes receiving a request from the lead vehicle or the following vehicle, where the request is generated from, for example, a human machine interface (HMI) (e.g., a display within the lead or following vehicle))
control the driveline such that the following […] vehicle follows the leading […] vehicle within a specified distance (FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle)
based on at least one of (a) first data acquired from at least one of the communications interface or from a global positioning system (GPS) ([0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link)
or (b) the second data acquired by the sensor system ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.).
While Ferone discloses in [0028] “as used herein, a “vehicle” is any form of motorized transport”, Ferone does not explicitly teach the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle.
However, Lin teaches a following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and a leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle ([0009] FIG. 2 illustrates an example scenario with two vehicles in a typical configuration where one vehicle leads and another vehicle follows; [0028] In general, the vehicle 105 may take the form of a car, truck, motorcycle, bus, boat, airplane, helicopter, lawn mower, earth mover, snowmobile, aircraft, recreational vehicle, amusement park vehicle, farm equipment, construction equipment, tram, golf cart, train, and trolley, for example).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the following vehicle and the leading vehicle as taught in Ferone to substitute a following golf vehicle and leading golf vehicle, respectively, as taught in Lin because it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another would have been obvious if the substitution yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. In this case, substituting a different known vehicle type to perform the same function (vehicle following) is a predictable variation. Further, Applicant’s specification [0013] describes different forms of vehicles and it appears the invention would perform well with any of the disclosed forms of vehicles. Selecting among known alternatives (vehicle forms) is a matter of design choice when the alternatives perform the same predictable function (vehicle following).
Regarding claim 2, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the request is received responsive to a user input at an operator interface of at least one of the leading golf vehicle or the following golf vehicle (Ferone [0020] As an example, the handshake process, in one arrangement, includes receiving a request from the lead vehicle or the following vehicle, where the request is generated from, for example, a human machine interface (HMI) (e.g., a display within the lead or following vehicle); see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 3, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance (Ferone [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle)
based on the first data and the second data (Ferone [0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link; Ferone [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; Ferone [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.).
Regarding claim 5, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the at least one processing circuit is located on the following golf vehicle (Ferone FIG. 1 processor(s) 110; Ferone [0072] The vehicle 100 can include one or more processors 110; Ferone [0091] The modules can be implemented as computer-readable program code that, when executed by a processor 110, implement one or more of the various processes described herein; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 6, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the request includes a command for the leading golf vehicle and the following golf vehicle to form a short-range communication connection (Ferone [0004] For example, the handshake process includes, in one approach, receiving a request to initiate hitchless towing from the lead vehicle, accepting the request at the following vehicle, and upon acceptance of the request, establishing a wireless communication link between the lead vehicle and the following vehicle; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 8, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to:
acquire the second data in response to the request; and (Ferone [0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; Ferone [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; Ferone [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.)
control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based at least on the second data (Ferone FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; Ferone [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 9, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 8.
Ferone also teaches wherein the one or more sensors of the sensor system include at least one of a camera, a LiDAR sensor, or a radar sensor ([0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.; [0058] …by processing image, radar, and/or LiDAR data captured by sensors of the vehicle 100).
Regarding claim 12, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to:
acquire the first data in response to the request (Ferone [0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link); and
control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based at least on the first data (Ferone FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; Ferone [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 13, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein: the first data includes first GPS data associated with the leading golf vehicle and second GPS data associated with the following golf vehicle (Ferone [0038] The positions of the lead vehicle and the vehicle 100, in one approach, include the global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of the lead vehicle and the vehicle 100);
the instructions cause the at least one processor to compare the first GPS data to the second GPS data associated with the following golf vehicle to determine a current distance between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle; and (Ferone [0048] For example, the lead vehicle may communicate its current speed and position (i.e., GPS coordinates) to the vehicle 100 over the wireless communication link as the vehicle 100 travels on the hitching path; Ferone [0050] That is, the control module 220, in one arrangement, controls the vehicle 100 to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to follow a trajectory of the lead vehicle; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
While Ferone controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle, Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach controlling the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance includes: responsive to the current distance being above the specified distance, causing the prime mover to increase a speed of the following golf vehicle; and responsive to the current distance being below the specified distance, causing the prime mover to decrease the speed of the following golf vehicle.
However, Lin teaches controlling the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance includes: (FIG. 4 distance differential dactual – ddesired; [0050] Specifically, the example embodiments described herein relate to an adaptive cruise control system and method that allows a controlled vehicle to autonomously and safely follow behind a lead vehicle positioned in front of the autonomous vehicle. In an example embodiment, both the relative distance and relative velocity between the two vehicles are taken into account in order to calculate and control the autonomous vehicle's desired distance or velocity at each time step. In an example embodiment, the velocity command generation module 175 can use the following expression to generate the velocity command, Vcmd, 220),
responsive to the current distance being above the specified distance, causing the prime mover to increase a speed of the following golf vehicle; ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is greater than the specified distance, dactual > ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm increases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance)
responsive to the current distance being below the specified distance, causing the prime mover to decrease the speed of the following golf vehicle ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is less than the specified distance, dactual < ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm decreases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the controlling as taught in Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Lin to include controlling the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance includes: responsive to the current distance being above the specified distance, causing the prime mover to increase a speed of the following golf vehicle; and responsive to the current distance being below the specified distance, causing the prime mover to decrease the speed of the following golf vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing so would have achieved the benefit of “better adaptive cruise control” (Lin [0006]).
Regarding claim 14, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 13.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the first GPS data is acquired by the communications interface from the leading golf vehicle (Ferone [0048] For example, the lead vehicle may communicate its current speed and position (i.e., GPS coordinates) to the vehicle 100 over the wireless communication link as the vehicle 100 travels on the hitching path; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 15, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 13.
Ferone also teaches wherein the first GPS data is acquired from the GPS ([0040] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data; [0080] In one or more arrangements, the vehicle sensor(s) 121 can include […] a global navigation satellite system (GNSS), a global positioning system (GPS)).
Regarding claim 16, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein: the first data includes a path of the leading golf vehicle; and (FIG. 4 path 430)
controlling the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data includes causing the following golf vehicle to follow the path of the leading golf vehicle (Ferone [0068] Accordingly, the hitching path 430 includes curves which represent points at which the hitching system 170 causes the following vehicle 410 to execute steering maneuvers so that the following vehicle 410 can reach the end of the hitching path 430 in a substantially similar orientation as the lead vehicle 420; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
Regarding claim 19, Ferone teaches a vehicle following system comprising:
a non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a processing circuit, cause the processing circuit to perform operations comprising ([0011] In one embodiment, a non-transitory computer-readable medium and including instructions that when executed by one or more processors cause the one or more processors to perform one or more functions is disclosed):
receiving a request for a following vehicle to follow a leading […] vehicle (FIG. 3 310; [0020] As an example, the handshake process, in one arrangement, includes receiving a request from the lead vehicle or the following vehicle, where the request is generated from, for example, a human machine interface (HMI) (e.g., a display within the lead or following vehicle));
receiving at least one of (a) first data acquired from at least one of a communications interface or a global positioning system (GPS) or (b) second data acquired by a sensor system of the following vehicle; and ([0040] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data; [0080] In one or more arrangements, the vehicle sensor(s) 121 can include […] a global navigation satellite system (GNSS), a global positioning system (GPS))
controlling a driveline of the following vehicle such that the following vehicle follows the leading vehicle within a specified distance (FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle)
based on at least one of the first data ([0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link)
or the second data ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.).
While Ferone discloses in [0028] “as used herein, a “vehicle” is any form of motorized transport”, Ferone does not explicitly teach the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle.
However, Lin teaches a leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle ([0009] FIG. 2 illustrates an example scenario with two vehicles in a typical configuration where one vehicle leads and another vehicle follows; [0028] In general, the vehicle 105 may take the form of a car, truck, motorcycle, bus, boat, airplane, helicopter, lawn mower, earth mover, snowmobile, aircraft, recreational vehicle, amusement park vehicle, farm equipment, construction equipment, tram, golf cart, train, and trolley, for example).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the leading vehicle as taught in Ferone to substitute a leading golf vehicle, respectively, as taught in Lin because it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another would have been obvious if the substitution yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. In this case, substituting a different known vehicle type to perform the same function (vehicle following) is a predictable variation. Further, Applicant’s specification [0013] describes different forms of vehicles and it appears the invention would perform well with any of the disclosed forms of vehicles. Selecting among known alternatives (vehicle forms) is a matter of design choice when the alternatives perform the same predictable function (vehicle following).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferone, in view of Lin, in further view of Hatano et al. (US-20250251040-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Hatano.
Regarding claim 4, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the at least one processing circuit includes a first processing circuit located on the following golf vehicle and a second processing circuit (Ferone FIG. 1 processor(s) 110; Ferone [0072] The vehicle 100 can include one or more processors 110; Ferone [0091] The modules can be implemented as computer-readable program code that, when executed by a processor 110, implement one or more of the various processes described herein; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle).
While Ferone suggests by discloses in [0101] “the program code may execute […] partly on a remote computer, or entirely on the remote computer or server”, Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach that the second processing circuit is located “remote” from the following golf vehicle.
However, Hatano teaches a first processing circuit located on the following golf vehicle; and (FIG. 2 in-vehicle control device)
a second processing circuit located “remote” from the following vehicle (FIG. 1 server 20; [0021] The convoy speed change control unit may be provided in a server installed at a head office or a business office of a transportation company or the like that manages the convoy participating vehicles, or at any other place, for example, but may also be mounted on the convoy participating vehicles. The convoy participating vehicle includes, for example, one leading vehicle for autonomous driving and at least one following vehicle).
It would have been obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art to modify the location of the second processing circuit as taught in Ferone, as modified, to have the second processing circuit be located “remote” from the following golf vehicle as taught in Hatano, with a reasonable expectation of success since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, except with regard to the position of the component, as long as the relocation of the component would not have modified the operation of the device, the particular placement would be an obvious matter of design choice (In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). In this case, Hatano [0021] clearly suggests the interchangeability of using a second processing circuit that is located either on-board or remote from the following vehicle with no modification to the vehicle following operations.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferone, in view of Lin, in further view of Cho (US-20240152153-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Cho.
Regarding claim 7, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 6.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the first data is acquired from the communications interface (Ferone [0039] In one approach, the control module 220 determines the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by receiving GPS coordinates from the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link).
wherein the first data includes […] a current distance between the between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle, and (Ferone [0056] In one approach, the control module 220 receives the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle over the wireless communication link, where the initial position and orientation include GPS coordinates and a heading direction of the lead vehicle. Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle)
Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach: wherein the first data includes “a connection strength of the short-range communication indicative of a current distance” between the between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle.
However, Cho teaches wherein the first data includes a “connection strength of the short-range communication indicative of a current distance” between the between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle ([0070] Meanwhile, the first distance between the host vehicle and the rear vehicle may be determined based on the received strength of a wireless signal received from the rear vehicle; [0071] In this case, as the received strength of the wireless signal increases, a distance between the host vehicle and the rear vehicle decreases and thus the first distance may be considered to be small, and as the received strength of a wireless signal decreases, a distance between the host vehicle and the rear vehicle increases and thus the first distance may be considered to be great).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify how the current distance is determined based on the first data as taught in Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Cho to include wherein the first data includes “a connection strength of the short-range communication indicative of a current distance” between the between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success to help “stably follow the driving trajectory of the host vehicle” (Cho [0043]). Additionally, determining a distance between vehicles is well-known in the art, and Applicant’s specification [0059]-[0061] describes different embodiments to calculate a distance between vehicles, i.e., via communication signal strength, GPS, or sensor data, with Applicant having no disclosed preference between any of the different embodiments. In light of the prior art and Applicant’s specification, the different ways to determine distance present the same or similar (predictable) result in determining the distance between vehicles. The replacement of one known distance calculation with another is obvious as in the current case, both are known in the prior art (using GPS or communication signal strength), and selecting one over the other would have been a predictable design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
While Ferone controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle, Ferone does not explicitly teach responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; and responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance.
However, Lin teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to: (FIG. 4 distance differential dactual – ddesired; [0050] Specifically, the example embodiments described herein relate to an adaptive cruise control system and method that allows a controlled vehicle to autonomously and safely follow behind a lead vehicle positioned in front of the autonomous vehicle. In an example embodiment, both the relative distance and relative velocity between the two vehicles are taken into account in order to calculate and control the autonomous vehicle's desired distance or velocity at each time step. In an example embodiment, the velocity command generation module 175 can use the following expression to generate the velocity command, Vcmd, 220),
responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; and ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is greater than the specified distance, dactual > ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm increases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance)
responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is less than the specified distance, dactual < ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm decreases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the controlling as taught in Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Lin to include responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; and responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing so would have achieved the benefit of “better adaptive cruise control” (Lin [0006]).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferone, in view of Lin, in further view of Osanai (US-20090240432-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Osanai.
Regarding claim 10, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 8.
Ferone, as modified, also teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to:
detect a physical identifier associated with the leading golf vehicle from the second data (Ferone [0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; Ferone [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; Ferone [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.; see rejection of claim 1 cited to Lin teaching the following vehicle is a “golf” vehicle and the leading vehicle is a leading “golf” vehicle);
Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach: correlate a size of the physical identifier to a current distance between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle;
However, Osanai teaches detect a physical identifier associated with the leading vehicle from the second data ([0022] Referring to the example shown in FIG. 3(a), a size dimension (e.g., width) of an object which is detected, as measured in a captured image obtained by the camera of a vehicle-installed obstacle detection apparatus is designated as Ls; [0024] When the detected obstacle is a preceding vehicle, the size dimension is preferably the distance between two tail lamps of that vehicle.);
correlate a size of the physical identifier to a current distance between the following vehicle and the leading vehicle ([0022] The distance from the camera to the target object (i.e., distance from the local vehicle to the target object) is designated as D, which is calculated using equation (1); [0036] A known type of image processing is then applied to the image, for estimated respective distance values corresponding to these image regions (detected objects); [0050] Furthermore since the obstacle detection apparatus 1 can obtain the size dimension value Lt as the distance between tail lamps of a preceding vehicle, accurate measurement of the distance D can be achieved even during night-time operation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify how the current distance is determined based on the second data as taught in Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Osanai to include correlate a size of the physical identifier to a current distance between the following golf vehicle and the leading golf vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success to assist in “accurate distance measurement even during night-time operation” (Osanai [0050]). Additionally, determining a distance between vehicles is well-known in the art, and Applicant’s specification [0059]-[0061] describes different embodiments to calculate a distance between vehicles, i.e., via communication signal strength, GPS, or sensor data, with Applicant having no disclosed preference between any of the different embodiments. In light of the prior art and Applicant’s specification, the different ways to determine distance present the same or similar (predictable) result in determining the distance between vehicles. The replacement of one known distance calculation with another is obvious as in the current case, both are known in the prior art (using GPS or communication signal strength), and selecting one over the other would have been a predictable design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
While Ferone controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle, Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; and responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance.
However, Lin teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to: (FIG. 4 distance differential dactual – ddesired; [0050] Specifically, the example embodiments described herein relate to an adaptive cruise control system and method that allows a controlled vehicle to autonomously and safely follow behind a lead vehicle positioned in front of the autonomous vehicle. In an example embodiment, both the relative distance and relative velocity between the two vehicles are taken into account in order to calculate and control the autonomous vehicle's desired distance or velocity at each time step. In an example embodiment, the velocity command generation module 175 can use the following expression to generate the velocity command, Vcmd, 220),
responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is greater than the specified distance, dactual > ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm increases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance)
responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance ([0050] Vcm command
:
formula shows that when the current distance is less than the specified distance, dactual < ddesired, the following vehicle velocity Vcm decreases, which closes the distance differential, reducing the current distance).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the controlling as taught in Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Lin to include responsive to the current distance being greater than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to reduce the current distance; and responsive to the current distance being less than the specified distance, control the driveline to cause the following golf vehicle to increase the current distance, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing so would have achieved the benefit of “better adaptive cruise control” (Lin [0006]).
Regarding claim 11, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 10.
Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein the physical identifier includes at least one of: a configuration of the leading golf vehicle; one or more taillights of the leading golf vehicle; or one or more fiducial markers positioned on the leading golf vehicle.
However, Osanai also teaches wherein the physical identifier includes at least one of: a configuration of the leading vehicle; one or more taillights of the leading vehicle; or one or more fiducial markers positioned on the leading vehicle ([0024] When the detected obstacle is a preceding vehicle, the size dimension is preferably the distance between two tail lamps of that vehicle; [0050] Furthermore since the obstacle detection apparatus 1 can obtain the size dimension value Lt as the distance between tail lamps of a preceding vehicle, accurate measurement of the distance D can be achieved even during night-time operation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Osanai to include wherein the physical identifier includes at least one of: a configuration of the leading golf vehicle; one or more taillights of the leading golf vehicle; or one or more fiducial markers positioned on the leading golf vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success to assist in “accurate distance measurement even during night-time operation” (Osanai [0050]).
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferone, in view of Lin, in further view of Schuh et al. (US-20230135207-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Schuh.
Regarding claim 17, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1.
Ferone also teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to: acquire the second data ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles);
detect, based on the second data, an obstacle between the leading golf vehicle and the following golf vehicle ([0043] As such, in one embodiment, the control module 220 processes the sensor data 250 to identify one or more obstacles (e.g., other vehicles, buildings, plants, pedestrians, etc.) on the hitching path);
control the braking system to cease motion of the following golf vehicle ([0061] For example, the control module 220 may control the vehicle 100 to avoid an obstacle on the hitching path by controlling the vehicle 100 to automatically perform an evasive maneuver using, for example, an ADAS of the vehicle 100 (e.g., automatic emergency braking). An evasive maneuver includes, for example, applying the brakes of the vehicle 100, stopping the vehicle 100, controlling the vehicle 100 to steer around an obstacle, etc. in a manner sufficient to avoid the one or more obstacles);
responsive to determining that the obstacle is no longer detected by the sensor system based on the second data, determine whether the leading golf vehicle is detectable with the sensor system based on the second data ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123, a LiDAR 124, and other sensors as may be suitable for identifying vehicles and locations of the vehicles; [0040] Alternatively, the control module 220 may determine the initial position and orientation of the lead vehicle by processing the sensor data 250; [0056] For example, the sensor data 250 may include GPS data, image data, IMU data, steering wheel angle data, etc.; [0063] In one approach, the control module 220 determines whether the lead vehicle is moving by processing the sensor data 250 about the lead vehicle);
control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the second data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is detectable by the sensor system (FIG. 3 330, 340, 350, 360, 370; [0026] After aligning the following vehicle with the lead vehicle, the system, in one embodiment, controls the following vehicle to perform the hitchless towing by following the lead vehicle without a physical connection. That is, the system controls the following vehicle to maintain a defined distance behind the lead vehicle and to execute instructions acquired from the lead vehicle).
Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data.
However, Schuh teaches acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and ([0100] There are also times when the partner vehicle is not within the radar's field of view or the radar or the radar unit is not operating as desired for a brief period. An independent way of determining the distance between the platoon partners is to utilize their respective GPS data; [0129] In that situation, the radar tracker 116/600 would not have a good estimate of the position of the back of the partner vehicle. As such, no target would match the expected position of the back of the partner vehicle at decision point 504 so no measured position would be reported to the gap controller and the radar unit's measurements would not be used to update the position and speed estimates)
control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data ([0104] That is, having a reasonable estimate of where the partner vehicle is likely to be in the context of a radar scene helps the gap monitor 600 properly identify the radar return object that corresponds to the back of the partner vehicle out of a radar scene that may include a set of detected objects. This helps ensure that the proper detected point is used in the gap control).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Schuh to include acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing to still ensure the proper target is tracked by using GPS (first data) when the partner vehicle is not within the radar's field of view or the radar or the radar unit is not operating as desired (second data) (Schuh [0104]).
Regarding claim 18, Ferone, as modified, teaches the golf vehicle following system of Claim 1. wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to:
Ferone also teaches acquire the second data ([0032] As provided for herein, the control module 220, in one embodiment, acquires sensor data 250 that includes at least camera images. In further arrangements, the control module 220 acquires the sensor data 250 from further sensors such as a radar 123).
Ferone, as modified, does not explicitly teach determine that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system based on the second data; acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data.
However, Schuh teaches determine that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system based on the second data ([0100] There are also times when the partner vehicle is not within the radar's field of view or the radar or the radar unit is not operating as desired for a brief period; [0129] In that situation, the radar tracker 116/600 would not have a good estimate of the position of the back of the partner vehicle. As such, no target would match the expected position of the back of the partner vehicle at decision point 504 so no measured position would be reported to the gap controller and the radar unit's measurements would not be used to update the position and speed estimates);
acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and ([0100] An independent way of determining the distance between the platoon partners is to utilize their respective GPS data)
control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data ([0104] That is, having a reasonable estimate of where the partner vehicle is likely to be in the context of a radar scene helps the gap monitor 600 properly identify the radar return object that corresponds to the back of the partner vehicle out of a radar scene that may include a set of detected objects. This helps ensure that the proper detected point is used in the gap control).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Ferone, as modified, to incorporate the teachings of Schuh to include determine that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system based on the second data; acquire the first data in response to determining that the leading golf vehicle is not detectable with the sensor system; and control the driveline such that the following golf vehicle follows the leading golf vehicle within the specified distance based on the first data, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing to still ensure the proper target is tracked by using GPS (first data) when the partner vehicle is not within the radar's field of view or the radar or the radar unit is not operating as desired (second data) (Schuh [0104]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210094577 A1: Shaley-Shwartz et al. in [0858]; US 20200327343 A1: Lund et al. in [0155], and US 20080252488 A1 Bos et al. in claim 9 and 14 all alternatively disclose the “correlating a size” limitation of claim 10.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVIN SEOL whose telephone number is (571) 272-6488. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached on (571) 270-3969. 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.
/DAVIN SEOL/Examiner, Art Unit 3662