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 .
Status of Claims
• This action is in reply to the Application Number 18/816,136 filed on 08/27/2024.
• Claims 1-17 are currently pending and have been examined.
• This action is made NON-FINAL.
• The examiner would like to note that this application is now being handled by examiner Kai Wang.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
The certified copy has been filed in Application No. 18/816,136 filed on 12/04/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/27/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1 is 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.
The claim 1 is rejected as being indefinite because the claim limitation reciting “ restart of automated traveling of the vehicle is permitted when an absolute value of a first position deviation between the target traveling path and the position of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined second threshold”. It is not clear what is “a first position deviation between the target traveling path and the position of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined second threshold” referring to. Is it referring to the difference of the planned vehicle position according to the target traveling path and the current position of the vehicle according to the position detection unit at the same time instance? Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the Office will interpret the limitation as any position deviation disclosed by the references.
Claims 2-15 are rejected because their dependence on the independent claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US20220326021A1) in view of MORIMOTO (US20230015153A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Tanaka teaches:
An automated driving system comprising a vehicle having a target traveling path for performing automated traveling, (Tanaka, para[02], “a vehicle control apparatus for realizing autonomous driving of a vehicle. A course generation apparatus in a vehicle control apparatus generates a target course (referred to also as a target route) for a vehicle.”)
the automated driving system being configured to acquire a position and an azimuth of the vehicle and a measurement reliability therefor, (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
and in a case where the measurement reliability is equal to or greater than a predetermined first threshold, (Tanaka, claim 3, “ in the case where the satellite-positioning reliability becomes the same as …a predetermined determination reliability”)
Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but MORIMOTO teaches:
wherein the vehicle includes an automated traveling restart determination circuitry to switch from a stopped state to automated traveling, (MORIMOTO, para [104], “restarting autonomous travel from any position P51 in FIG. 12F after temporarily stopping”)
restart of automated traveling of the vehicle is permitted when an absolute value of a first position deviation between the target traveling path and the position of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined second threshold and an absolute value of an angle deviation between an azimuth of the target traveling path and the azimuth of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined third threshold. (MORIMOTO, para [102], “it is possible to perform line alignment for making the positional deviation ΔJ5 and the orientational deviation ΔF3 less than the respective first thresholds (J11, F11). That is, it is possible to smoothly shift to autonomous travel when performing autonomous travel”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from MORIMOTO in order to include wherein the vehicle includes an automated traveling restart determination circuitry to switch from a stopped state to automated traveling, and restart of automated traveling of the vehicle is permitted when an absolute value of a first position deviation between the target traveling path and the position of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined second threshold and an absolute value of an angle deviation between an azimuth of the target traveling path and the azimuth of the vehicle is equal to or smaller than a predetermined third threshold. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “smoothly shift to autonomous travel after interrupting autonomous travel” (MORIMOTO)
Regarding claim 2:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tanaka teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle includes an own-vehicle position detector to detect a position and an azimuth of the own vehicle and acquire a measurement reliability therefor, and a positioning state storage to store the position and the azimuth of the own vehicle and the measurement reliability therefor acquired by the own-vehicle position detector (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”, and para [76],” As the storage apparatuses 91, there are provided a RAM (Random Access Memory) that can read data from and write data in the computing processing unit 90, a ROM (Read Only Memory) that can read data from the computing processing unit 90”)
and the measurement reliability…(Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but MORIMOTO teaches:
…at a time of finish of automated traveling, (MORIMOTO, para[68], “ finish of autonomous travel of the vehicle body 3 when operated”)
and the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle calculates a second position deviation between the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling and the position of the own vehicle at a last time of finish of automated traveling stored in the positioning state storage, and in a case where the second position deviation is equal to or smaller than a predetermined fourth threshold, performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle, using the azimuth of the own vehicle …therefor at the last time of finish of automated traveling stored in the positioning state storage. (MORIMOTO, para [104], “restarting autonomous travel”, para[107], “The autonomous travel controller 40A is configured or programmed to not perform the line alignment if the distance L40 between a vehicle body position that is the position of the vehicle body 3 when a command is issued by operating the travel switch 85 and an end portion of the planned travel line L1 in the movement direction of the vehicle body 3 is less than a predetermined distance.”, and para [102], “it is possible to perform line alignment for making the positional deviation ΔJ5 and the orientational deviation ΔF3 less than the respective first thresholds (J11, F11). That is, it is possible to smoothly shift to autonomous travel when performing autonomous travel”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from MORIMOTO in order to include the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle calculates a second position deviation between the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling and the position of the own vehicle at a last time of finish of automated traveling stored in the positioning state storage, and in a case where the second position deviation is equal to or smaller than a predetermined fourth threshold, performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle, using the azimuth of the own vehicle and the measurement reliability therefor at the last time of finish of automated traveling stored in the positioning state storage. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “smoothly shift to autonomous travel after interrupting autonomous travel” (MORIMOTO)
Claim(s) 3-7, 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US20220326021A1) in view of MORIMOTO (US20230015153A1) and Kakuta (US20220179423A1).
Regarding claim 3:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 2. Tanaka teaches:
Include a position and an azimuth (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth”)
associated with a greater one of the compared measurement reliabilities. (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 2, further comprising: at least one roadside device to detect an obstacle and a traveling road surface in a field of view; (Kakuta, para[05], “a first processing apparatus having a processor configured to implement a communication module that receives obstacle information from multiple roadside units, each roadside unit including multiple sensors for detecting obstacles within a predetermined field of view”, and para[24],” The sensors for each RSU 110 in this embodiment include, a millimeter-wave radar (MMWR) sensor 103, an image sensor 102 (front camera), and light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensors 104 (collectively referred to as ADAS sensors)”)
and an edge computer to output obstacle information including a position… of the obstacle and a measurement reliability therefor acquired from the roadside device, to the vehicle, (Kakuta, para[22], “a multi-access edge computer (MEC)”, and para [38], “After the MEC 200 determines the reliability of the obstacle information, the reliability values are transmitted to the vehicle”)
…included in the obstacle information acquired from the edge computer(Kakuta, para[22], “a multi-access edge computer (MEC)”, and para [38], “After the MEC 200 determines the reliability of the obstacle information, the reliability values are transmitted to the vehicle”)
…associated with a greater one of the compared measurement reliabilities. (Kakuta, para [31], “compared to when multiple RSUs make a detection, but is still considered a high reliability value”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include at least one roadside device to detect an obstacle and a traveling road surface in a field of view; and an edge computer to output obstacle information including a position of the obstacle and a measurement reliability therefor acquired from the roadside device, to the vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but MORIMOTO teaches:
wherein the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle compares magnitudes of the measurement reliability at a time of acquisition of the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling and the measurement reliability for the position of the own vehicle…, and performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle, using the position and the azimuth of the own vehicle (MORIMOTO, para [102], “it is possible to perform line alignment for making the positional deviation ΔJ5 and the orientational deviation ΔF3 less than the respective first thresholds (J11, F11). That is, it is possible to smoothly shift to autonomous travel when performing autonomous travel”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from MORIMOTO in order to include wherein the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle compares magnitudes of the measurement reliability at a time of acquisition of the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling and the measurement reliability for the position of the own vehicle, and performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle, using the position and the azimuth of the own vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “smoothly shift to autonomous travel after interrupting autonomous travel” (MORIMOTO)
Regarding claim 4:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Tanaka teaches:
a first vehicle direction calculation circuitry to calculate a direction of a stopped vehicle on the basis of the obstacle information, a first azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of a ground object fixed in the field of view on the basis of reflection points from the ground object in the obstacle information, and a first vehicle azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the stopped vehicle and a measurement reliability therefor, using the direction of the stopped vehicle calculated by the first vehicle direction calculation circuitry and the azimuth of the ground object calculated by the first azimuth calculation circuitry. (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 3, wherein the roadside device includes an optical sensor, and reflection points from the obstacle in the field of view are included as point-cloud data in the obstacle information, (Kakuta, para[05], “a first processing apparatus having a processor configured to implement a communication module that receives obstacle information from multiple roadside units, each roadside unit including multiple sensors for detecting obstacles within a predetermined field of view”, and para[24],” The sensors for each RSU 110 in this embodiment include, a millimeter-wave radar (MMWR) sensor 103, an image sensor 102 (front camera), and light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensors 104 (collectively referred to as ADAS sensors)”)
and the edge computer includes…( Kakuta, para[22], “a multi-access edge computer (MEC)”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein the roadside device includes an optical sensor, and reflection points from the obstacle in the field of view are included as point-cloud data in the obstacle information. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claims 5 and 7:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 4. Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 4, wherein in the obstacle information acquired from the roadside device, the measurement reliability is decreased with increase in a detection distance to the obstacle. (Kakuta, para[43], “obstacle proximity to the vehicle in accord with first, second and third predetermined distances where: 1st predetermined distance<2nd predetermined distance<3rd predetermined distance”, para [45], “shorter distances when object detection reliability is higher”, and Fig. 5 depicts that the measurement reliability is decreased with increase in a detection distance to the obstacle
PNG
media_image1.png
767
1139
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein in the obstacle information acquired from the roadside device, the measurement reliability is decreased with increase in a detection distance to the obstacle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claim 6:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Tanaka teaches:
and white line information of a traveling road surface is included in the obstacle information,( Tanaka, para [79], ” FIG. 3 illustrates an example of a forking zone where lane-line detection by a camera”)
a second azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate a white line reference azimuth which is a direction of a road, from the white line information included in the obstacle information, ( Tanaka, para [71], “lane widths, cant-angle or slant-angle information”)
and a second vehicle azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the stopped vehicle and a measurement reliability therefor, using the direction of the stopped vehicle calculated by the second vehicle direction calculation circuitry (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
and the white line reference azimuth calculated by the second azimuth calculation circuitry ( Tanaka, para [71], “lane widths, cant-angle or slant-angle information”)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 3, wherein the roadside device includes an image sensor, (Kakuta, para[05], “a first processing apparatus having a processor configured to implement a communication module that receives obstacle information from multiple roadside units, each roadside unit including multiple sensors for detecting obstacles within a predetermined field of view”, and para[24],” The sensors for each RSU 110 in this embodiment include, a millimeter-wave radar (MMWR) sensor 103, an image sensor 102 (front camera)”)
and the edge computer includes a second vehicle direction calculation circuitry to calculate a direction of a stopped vehicle on the basis of the obstacle information from the image sensor, (Kakuta, para[27], “receives position information of the vehicle”, and para [32], “, the position/location of the detected obstacles from each RSU is compared”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein the roadside device includes an image sensor and the edge computer includes a second vehicle direction calculation circuitry to calculate a direction of a stopped vehicle on the basis of the obstacle information from the image sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claim 9:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Tanaka teaches:
calculate an azimuth of the … vehicle (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 3, comprising a plurality of the vehicles for performing automated traveling, (Kakuta, para[10], “vehicles can be autonomously driven”)
wherein each vehicle includes an obstacle sensor to detect an obstacle around the own vehicle, (Kakuta, para[05], “ detecting obstacles within a predetermined field of view”)
a stopped-vehicle direction calculation circuitry to detect, as a stopped vehicle, another vehicle that has stopped, from the obstacle detected by the obstacle sensor, and estimate a direction of the stopped vehicle, and a stopped-vehicle first azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the stopped vehicle, using the azimuth of the own vehicle and the reliability therefor acquired by the own-vehicle position detector and the estimated direction of the stopped vehicle, and each vehicle transmits the azimuth of the stopped vehicle calculated by the stopped-vehicle first azimuth calculation circuitry, together with a position thereof and a measurement reliability therefor, to the edge computer. (Kakuta, para[27], “each RSU 110 includes a sensor fusion unit 107 to process the output of each of the sensors collectively to determine the presence of objects or obstacles as well as their respective locations. For example, the sensor fusion unit 107 processes the data from multiple sensors to obtain obstacle information including the location of the obstacle latitude (absolute position), longitude (absolute position), the velocity of obstacle, the height of the obstacle and object/obstacle classifications such as whether the object is a vehicle, a pedestrian or a cyclist, or the like.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein each vehicle includes an obstacle sensor to detect an obstacle around the own vehicle, a stopped-vehicle direction calculation circuitry to detect, as a stopped vehicle, another vehicle that has stopped, from the obstacle detected by the obstacle sensor, and estimate a direction of the stopped vehicle, and a stopped-vehicle first azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the stopped vehicle, using the azimuth of the own vehicle and the reliability therefor acquired by the own-vehicle position detector and the estimated direction of the stopped vehicle, and each vehicle transmits the azimuth of the stopped vehicle calculated by the stopped-vehicle first azimuth calculation circuitry, together with a position thereof and a measurement reliability therefor, to the edge computer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claim 10:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Tanaka teaches:
calculate an azimuth of the own vehicle vehicle (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth)
a sensor to detect a yaw rate of the own vehicle, (Tanaka, para[67], “The gyroscopic sensor 11 detects a yaw rate of the vehicle”)
a yaw angle calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the own vehicle from a yaw angle obtained by integrating the detected yaw rate, and a stopped-vehicle second azimuth calculation circuitry to calculate an azimuth of the stopped vehicle, using the azimuth of the own vehicle calculated by the yaw angle circuitry and the estimated direction of the stopped vehicle, and each vehicle transmits the azimuth of the stopped vehicle calculated by the stopped-vehicle second azimuth calculation circuitry, together with a position thereof and a measurement reliability therefor. (Tanaka, para[67], “The gyroscopic sensor 11 detects a yaw rate of the vehicle”, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 3, comprising a plurality of the vehicles for performing automated traveling, wherein each vehicle includes an obstacle sensor to detect an obstacle around the own vehicle, (Kakuta, para[10], “vehicles can be autonomously driven”, para[05], “ detecting obstacles within a predetermined field of view”)
a stopped-vehicle direction calculation circuitry to detect, as a stopped vehicle, another vehicle that has stopped, from the obstacle detected by the obstacle sensor, and estimate a direction of the stopped vehicle, (Kakuta, para[27], “each RSU 110 includes a sensor fusion unit 107 to process the output of each of the sensors collectively to determine the presence of objects or obstacles as well as their respective locations. For example, the sensor fusion unit 107 processes the data from multiple sensors to obtain obstacle information including the location of the obstacle latitude (absolute position), longitude (absolute position), the velocity of obstacle, the height of the obstacle and object/obstacle classifications such as whether the object is a vehicle, a pedestrian or a cyclist, or the like.”)
to the edge computer (Kakuta, para[22], “a multi-access edge computer”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein each vehicle includes an obstacle sensor to detect an obstacle around the own vehicle, a sensor to detect a yaw rate of the own vehicle, a stopped-vehicle direction calculation circuitry to detect, as a stopped vehicle, another vehicle that has stopped, from the obstacle detected by the obstacle sensor, and estimate a direction of the stopped vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claim 11:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 10. Tanaka teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 10, wherein in a case where the measurement reliability for the position and the azimuth of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
measurement reliability has become equal to or smaller than a predetermined threshold, (Kakuta, para[36],” the reliability value is set lower to a value of 2 (step S9)”).
the vehicle transmits, to the edge computer, the measurement reliability at that time and a position of the vehicle calculated by accumulating a movement distance acquired by a movement distance sensor provided to the vehicle. (Kakuta, para[22], “a multi-access edge computer (MEC)”, and para [38], “After the MEC 200 determines the reliability of the obstacle information, the reliability values are transmitted to the vehicle”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include measurement reliability has become equal to or smaller than a predetermined threshold, and the vehicle transmits, to the edge computer, the measurement reliability at that time and a position of the vehicle calculated by accumulating a movement distance acquired by a movement distance sensor provided to the vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Regarding claims 12-14:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Tanaka teaches:
using the position and the azimuth of the own vehicle associated with a greatest one of the compared measurement reliabilities. (Tanaka, para [68], “A positioning unit performs a positioning calculation, so that it is made possible to obtain an absolute position (i.e., latitude, longitude, and altitude), an absolute azimuth, and the reliability of each of them.”)
Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but MORIMOTO teaches:
and performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle, (MORIMOTO, para [104], “restarting autonomous travel”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from MORIMOTO in order to include performs determination for restart of automated traveling of the vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “smoothly shift to autonomous travel after interrupting autonomous travel” (MORIMOTO)
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Kakuta teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 9, wherein the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle compares magnitudes of the measurement reliability at the time of acquisition of the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling, the measurement reliability for the position of the own vehicle included in the obstacle information acquired from the edge computer, and the measurement reliability for the stopped vehicle acquired from the edge computer, (Kakuta, para[35], “ the value is compared to a predetermined difference value threshold (step S4). If the difference value δ is less than the threshold, the reliability is considered high”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Kakuta in order to include wherein the automated traveling restart determination circuitry of the vehicle compares magnitudes of the measurement reliability at the time of acquisition of the position of the own vehicle detected by the own-vehicle position detector before start of traveling, the measurement reliability for the position of the own vehicle included in the obstacle information acquired from the edge computer, and the measurement reliability for the stopped vehicle acquired from the edge computer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “improve obstacle detection during automated driving” (Kakuta)
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US20220326021A1) in view of MORIMOTO (US20230015153A1) and Kakuta (US20220179423A1), further in view of Ichikawa (US20170265725A1).
Regarding claim 8:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO and Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 7. Tanaka does not explicitly teach, but Ichikawa teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 7, wherein the measurement reliability is decreased in a case where a content rate of noise in an image acquired from the image sensor of the roadside device is equal to or greater than a predetermined noise threshold.( Ichikawa, para[90], “The reliability decreases as the amount of noise due to the image sensor… increases”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Ichikawa in order to include wherein the measurement reliability is decreased in a case where a content rate of noise in an image acquired from the image sensor of the roadside device is equal to or greater than a predetermined noise threshold. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the image reliability.
Claim(s) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US20220326021A1) in view of MORIMOTO (US20230015153A1), further in view of Shimizu (JP H10105890 A).
Regarding claims 15-16:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO does not explicitly teach, but Shimizu teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle is a vehicle that performs following traveling above an electromagnetic guide wire installed at a road surface, and the vehicle includes a guide sensor to detect a varying magnetic field from the electromagnetic guide wire, and map information including the electromagnetic guide wire.( Shimizu, para [05], “A system has also been proposed in which a pair of conducting wires is embedded in the road and signals are sent and received between the road and the vehicle using electromagnetic induction coupling”, para [04], “a system has been proposed in which magnetic nails are embedded in the road surface along the road direction and detected by a magnetic sensor installed on the vehicle body”, and para [19], “a road marker map memory 15 that stores codes and coordinate data strings formed by the magnetic tape MT and the induction wire IW”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Shimizu in order to include wherein the vehicle is a vehicle that performs following traveling above an electromagnetic guide wire installed at a road surface, and the vehicle includes a guide sensor to detect a varying magnetic field from the electromagnetic guide wire, and map information including the electromagnetic guide wire. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to “accurately recognize the vehicle's travel distance”( Shimizu).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US20220326021A1) in view of MORIMOTO (US20230015153A1) and Kakuta (US20220179423A1), further in view of Shimizu (JP H10105890 A).
Regarding claim 17:
Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, Kakuta, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Tanaka in view of MORIMOTO, Kakuta does not explicitly teach, but Shimizu teaches:
The automated driving system according to claim 3, wherein the vehicle is a vehicle that performs following traveling above an electromagnetic guide wire installed at a road surface, and the vehicle includes a guide sensor to detect a varying magnetic field from the electromagnetic guide wire, and map information including the electromagnetic guide wire. ( Shimizu, para [05], “A system has also been proposed in which a pair of conducting wires is embedded in the road and signals are sent and received between the road and the vehicle using electromagnetic induction coupling”, para [04], “a system has been proposed in which magnetic nails are embedded in the road surface along the road direction and detected by a magnetic sensor installed on the vehicle body”, and para [19], “a road marker map memory 15 that stores codes and coordinate data strings formed by the magnetic tape MT and the induction wire IW”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify automated driving system from Tanaka to include these above teachings from Shimizu in order to include wherein the vehicle is a vehicle that performs following traveling above an electromagnetic guide wire installed at a road surface, and the vehicle includes a guide sensor to detect a varying magnetic field from the electromagnetic guide wire, and map information including the electromagnetic guide wire. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to “accurately recognize the vehicle's travel distance”( Shimizu).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
HOSOI (US20210086791A1) teaches a vehicle traveling control device that prevents abnormal operation caused by misidentification of an obstacle during automatic traveling control using a measurement result of a vehicle-mounted sensor and a dynamic map.
BHAGAT (US20220182784A1) teaches an apparatus and a method for providing location information, and, more particularly, to providing location information in the areas where the Global Positioning System (GPS) service is unavailable or unreliable.
XIA (US20220178718A1) teaches a method for producing a high definition map (HD map) for control of one or more autonomous vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAI NMN WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5633. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0800-1700.
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached on (571) 272-5109. 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.
/KAI NMN WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/REDHWAN K MAWARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667