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 .
This is a Non-Final rejection on the merits of this application. Claims 1-20 are currently pending, as discussed below.
Examiner Notes that the fundamentals of the rejections are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Status of the Claims
This is a Final Office Action in response to Applicant’s amendment of 10 March 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered as follows.
Response to Amendment and/or Argument
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 18 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments with respect to the Claim Rejections of Claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as set forth in the office action 10 December 2025 have been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the Claim Rejections of Claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as set forth in the office action 10 December 2025 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore et al. (US 2019/0186947 A1 hereinafter Rockmore) in view of Oba (US 2024/0280997 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 (similarly claims 18 and 20), Rockmore teaches A vehicle navigation method, performed by an electronic device (see at least Fig. 1-4 Abstract), comprising:
displaying an assisted driving interface including self-driving information of a vehicle in response to the vehicle being in a self-driving state; (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: As illustrated in Fig. 3B, the mode indicator banner 321 indicates that the vehicle 10 is currently operating in the self-driving mode that includes textual information that also indicates (e.g., “SELF-DRIVING ENGAGED”) is also color-coded accordingly (e.g. in green).)
in response to a distance between a location of the vehicle and a state switching point being shorter than a distance threshold, outputting takeover prompt information based on the assisted driving interface, the state switching point being a location on a road at which the vehicle is automatically switched from the self-driving state to a manual driving state; (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: Referring to Fig. 3C., as the vehicle 10 approaches closer to the location associated with the anticipated change in mode of autonomous operation, the navigation user interface 330 can be pivoted to display an additional feature—a direction pane 338 to present additional information regarding the autonomy-switching directions. For instance, as illustrated, the direction pane 338 informs the operator of the vehicle 10 that the vehicle 10 is approaching manual driving and that the operator should be prepared to take over control of the vehicle 10. The direction pane 338 can be selectively presented within the navigation user interface 330 based on the proximity of the vehicle 10 to the location of the anticipated change in autonomous operations. As the vehicle 10 approaches the location, the map display 333 can be shrunken such that the direction pane 338 can be displayed.) and
displaying a navigation map in response to the vehicle being switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state. (see at least Fig. 3A-3C)
Rockmore does not explicitly teach wherein the display the navigation map comprises: switching from displaying the assisted driving interface to display a map navigation interface; transmitting, in response to the vehicle being switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state, a state switching request to a server; receiving navigation map data from the server in response to the state switching request; and displaying, in the map navigation interface, the navigation map based on the navigation map data.
Oba is directed to system and method for operating autonomous vehicle, Oba teaches wherein the display the navigation map comprises: switching from displaying the assisted driving interface to display a map navigation interface; transmitting, in response to the vehicle being switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state, a state switching request to a server; receiving navigation map data from the server in response to the state switching request; and displaying, in the map navigation interface, the navigation map based on the navigation map data. (see at least Fig. 10-17 [0250-0285]: The server receives a support request and information from the vehicle 1. The server transmits information necessary for remote driving to the remote operator. The HMI used by the controller and the operator includes a monitor to overlook a wide area map of an in-charge area. The monitor displays that provide information acquired by the server in a visual form. The monitor displays the position of the vehicle requesting the remote steering support on the wide area map and a traveling track of the vehicle is displayed on the map.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rockmore’s autonomy-switching direction within the navigation user interface to incorporate the technique of transmitting a request to a server and receiving navigation map data for display upon transitioning from autonomous to manual driving when the vehicle encounters a condition requiring human intervention as taught by Oba with reasonable expectation of success to incorporate server based map retrieval and display into the system of Oba into Rockmore’s system and doing so would improve autonomous vehicle operational safety during vehicle driving transition and enhance operator’s situational awareness whether human operator is remote or local to the vehicle.
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
Rockmore further teaches displaying state switching auxiliary information in the assisted driving interface, the state switching auxiliary information including at least one of the state switching point, the distance, or a remaining time for the vehicle to the state switching point based on the self-driving state. (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: The direction banner 322 selectively presents an autonomy-switching direction (e.g., “Self-driving map exit”) regarding an upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations. The direction banner 322 further includes an indication of the distance to the location associated with the upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations (e.g., “800 ft”).)
Regarding Claim 7, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 6, wherein:
Rockmore further teaches the state switching auxiliary information includes the distance; (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: The direction banner 322 selectively presents an autonomy-switching direction (e.g., “Self-driving map exit”) regarding an upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations. The direction banner 322 further includes an indication of the distance to the location associated with the upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations (e.g., “800 ft”).) and
displaying, the state switching auxiliary information in the assisted driving interface includes (see at least Fig. 3A-3C)
displaying a traveling path of the vehicle in the assisted driving interface(see at least Fig. 3A-3C); and
displaying, on the traveling path, a target path segment between the location of the vehicle and the state switching point in a style that distinguish the target path segment from another path segment, other than the target path segment, in the traveling path. (see at least Fig. 3A-3C)
Regarding Claim 15, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising, after displaying the navigation map:
Rockmore further teaches in response to a switching condition for switching from the manual driving state to the self-driving state being met, displaying state switching prompt information that indicates that switching the manual state to the self-driving state is allowed. (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: As illustrated in Fig. 3A, the mode indicator banner indicates that the vehicle is currently operating in the manual-driving mode. In response to determining that the vehicle is approaching a location associated with an anticipated change in autonomous operation, the on-board computing system can determine to display the autonomy-switching direction corresponds to the anticipated change in autonomous operation (along with textual description of the anticipated change e.g. begin self-driving) within the direction banner. )
Regarding Claim 16, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1,
Rockmore further teaches wherein the state switching point is a first state switching point; (see at least Fig. 1-4)
the method further comprising, after displaying the navigation map(see at least Fig. 1-4):
displaying a second state switching point, the second switching point being a location on the road at which a switching condition for switching from the manual driving state to the self-driving state is met (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: the on-board computing system can determine one or more anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operations along the route. The on-board computing system can, for example, partition the route into a plurality of route segments and retrieve autonomous operation permissions (AOPs) for the plurality of route segments. The AOPs can be maintained by the on-board computing system within an on-board storage or can be retrieved from a network database. Each of the AOPs can indicate whether self-driving mode is permitted for the vehicle on the vehicle is operating on a corresponding one of the plurality of route segments. The AOPs can be pre-determined based on, for example, legal restrictions, technological limitations, and logistical reasons (e.g., route segment not yet mapped for self-driving). The one or more anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation of the vehicle can be determined at least in part on the AOPs retrieved for the plurality of route segments. In addition, the on-board computing system can determine anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation based on the route itself. For instance, at or near the start location (e.g., a pick-up location for a user of the network service) and/or the service location (e.g., a drop-off location for the user), the on-board computing system can determine that the vehicle is to operate in the manual-driving mode and can determine anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation as a result.)
Regarding Claim 17, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 15,
Rockmore further teaches wherein the distance is a first distance and the distance threshold is a first distance threshold; (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: Referring to Fig. 3C., as the vehicle 10 approaches closer to the location associated with the anticipated change in mode of autonomous operation, the navigation user interface 330 can be pivoted to display an additional feature—a direction pane 338 to present additional information regarding the autonomy-switching directions. For instance, as illustrated, the direction pane 338 informs the operator of the vehicle 10 that the vehicle 10 is approaching manual driving and that the operator should be prepared to take over control of the vehicle 10. The direction pane 338 can be selectively presented within the navigation user interface 330 based on the proximity of the vehicle 10 to the location of the anticipated change in autonomous operations. As the vehicle 10 approaches the location, the map display 333 can be shrunken such that the direction pane 338 can be displayed.)
the method further comprising: displaying a second distance between the location of the vehicle and the second state switching point; and displaying, in response to the second distance being shorter than a second distance threshold, a switching control configured for switching from the manual driving state to the self-driving state. (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: The one or more anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation of the vehicle can be determined at least in part on the AOPs retrieved for the plurality of route segments. In addition, the on-board computing system can determine anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation based on the route itself. For instance, at or near the start location (e.g., a pick-up location for a user of the network service) and/or the service location (e.g., a drop-off location for the user), the on-board computing system can determine that the vehicle is to operate in the manual-driving mode and can determine anticipated changes in the mode of autonomous operation as a result. In addition, the on-board computing system can selectively present the autonomous-switching directions within, for example, a navigation user interface. The on-board computing system can selectively present the autonomous-switching directions such that the directions are displayed at the appropriate times and/or locations based on the locations associated with the anticipated autonomy changes, the vehicle location (e.g., as determined based on location data generated by location-aware sensors on the vehicle), and/or the vehicle's speed.)
Claim(s) 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba and Chang (US 2019/0226866 A1).
Regarding Claim 2 (Similarly Claim 19), The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1 (similarly claim 18), further comprising:
Rockmore does not explicitly teach displaying a navigation floating layer or a floating window; and displaying a navigation route of the vehicle in the navigation floating layer or the floating window.
Chang is directed to navigation system and metho using augmented reality, Chang teaches displaying a navigation floating layer or a floating window; and displaying a navigation route of the vehicle in the navigation floating layer or the floating window. (see at least Fig. 5c, 8B-8C [0053-0078]: navigation layer including a display area for displaying additional information after a threshold distance has been crossed. Display area can be a top-down view of a surrounding area that illustrates the upcoming route.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying a navigation floating layer or a floating window; and displaying a navigation route of the vehicle in the navigation floating layer or the floating window as taught by Chang with reasonable expectation of success such that the navigational layer can clearly convey in an easily understood manner where the user should be while traveling along the route (Chang [0078]).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba, Chang and Alders et al. (US 2014/0114575 A1 hereinafter Alders).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Rockmore in view of Oba and Chang teaches The method according to claim 2, further comprising: while the vehicle is traveling based on the self-driving state,
the combination of Rockmore in view of Oba and Chang does not explicitly teach adjusting a display area of the navigation floating layer or the floating window, a size of the display area of the navigation floating layer or the floating window being negatively correlated with the distance.
Alders is directed to method and system for providing information using a navigation apparatus, Alders teaches adjusting a display area of the navigation floating layer or the floating window, a size of the display area of the navigation floating layer or the floating window being negatively correlated with the distance. (see at least Fig. 5-8b Abstract [0158-0188]: A visual or audible navigation instruction, warning or alert is provided to a user via the apparatus. The navigation instruction, warning or alert is enhanced in a continuous or stepped manner as a given location to which the instruction, warning or alert relates is approached. The instruction may be an instruction regarding a maneuver to be performed at a junction in order to follow a calculated route. The instruction is visually enhanced by increasing its size as the current location of the apparatus becomes closer to the junction to more readily engage the attention of the user, and to facilitate interpretation of the instruction.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore, Oba and Chang to incorporate the technique of adjusting a display are of the navigation floating window/layer wherein a size of the display area of the navigation floating layer or the floating window being negatively correlated with the distance as taught by Alders with reasonable expectation of success to provide improved methods of providing navigation instructions, warnings or alerts using a navigation apparatus where the instruction is visually enhanced by increasing its size as the current location of the apparatus becomes closer to the junction to more readily engage the attention of the user, and to facilitate interpretation of the instruction (Alders, Abstract).
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba and Yamamoto et al. (US 2022/0340156 A1 hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding Claim 4, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying takeover guidance information in the assisted driving interface, the takeover guidance information indicating to perform a target operation that triggers the vehicle switch from the self-driving state to the manual driving state before the vehicle reaches the state switching point.
Yamamoto is directed to HMI control device for providing action instruction displaying automated driving actions, Yamamoto teaches displaying takeover guidance information in the assisted driving interface, the takeover guidance information indicating to perform a target operation that triggers the vehicle switch from the self-driving state to the manual driving state before the vehicle reaches the state switching point. (see at least Fig. 5-16 [0117-0185]: In response to the driving changeover request, the display command transmission portion transmits the display command information to the HMI control device allowing the front display device to provide the transition-related display and action instruction as illustrated in Fig. 5, 12, 14, 16.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying takeover guidance information in the assisted driving interface, the takeover guidance information indicating to perform a target operation that triggers the vehicle switch from the self-driving state to the manual driving state as taught by Yamamoto with reasonable expectation of success to provide a system and method that can successfully enhance the driver’s awareness concerning the transition between autonomous driving levels due to the termination of automated driving (Yamamoto [0034]).
Regarding Claim 5, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying operation indication information in the assisted driving interface, the operation indication information indicating a control operation to perform on the vehicle after the vehicle is switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state.
Yamamoto is directed to HMI control device for providing action instruction displaying automated driving actions, Yamamoto teaches displaying operation indication information in the assisted driving interface, the operation indication information indicating a control operation to perform on the vehicle after the vehicle is switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state. (see at least Fig. 5-16 [0117-0185]: After the manual operation starts at time T 13 , the stabilized driver's driving manipulation can smoothly shift the manual operation to the hands-off operation. Then, the manipulation state determination portion 183 determines the driver's driving manipulation state. The automation level determining portion 184 permits the hands-off operation when the manipulation state determination portion 183 determines that the driving manipulation state corresponding to the manual operation is stabilized (i.e., stably continues).)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying operation indication information in the assisted driving interface, the operation indication information indicating a control operation to perform on the vehicle after the vehicle is switched from the self-driving state to the manual driving state as taught by Yamamoto with reasonable expectation of success to provide a system and method that can successfully enhance the driver’s awareness concerning the transition between autonomous driving levels due to the termination of automated driving (Yamamoto [0034]).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba and Yamamoto et al. (US 2022/0289228 A1 hereinafter Yamamoto’228).
Regarding Claim 8, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying, in the assisted driving interface, at least one travelable lane of the vehicle corresponding to a target location in a style that distinguishes the travelable lane from one or more other lanes, other than the at least one travelable lane, in the assisted driving interface, the at least one travelable lane including a lane in which the vehicle currently travels.
Yamamoto’228 is directed to HMI control device for providing action instruction displaying automated driving actions, Yamamoto’228 teaches displaying, in the assisted driving interface, at least one travelable lane of the vehicle corresponding to a target location in a style that distinguishes the travelable lane from one or more other lanes, other than the at least one travelable lane, in the assisted driving interface, the at least one travelable lane including a lane in which the vehicle currently travels. (see at least Fig. 3-33)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying, in the assisted driving interface, at least one travelable lane of the vehicle corresponding to a target location in a style that distinguishes the travelable lane from one or more other lanes, other than the at least one travelable lane, in the assisted driving interface, the at least one travelable lane including a lane in which the vehicle currently travels as taught by Yamamoto’228 with reasonable expectation of success and doing so would improve the confidence of an occupant of an own vehicle in a result of automatic lane selection or automatic lane change by the own vehicle (Yamamoto’228 [0045]).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba and Hattori et al. (US 2020/0307644 A1 hereinafter Hattori).
Regarding Claim 9, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1,
Rockmore further teaches wherein the distance threshold is a first distance threshold; (see at least Fig. 1-4 [0023-0059]: The direction banner 322 selectively presents an autonomy-switching direction (e.g., “Self-driving map exit”) regarding an upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations. The direction banner 322 further includes an indication of the distance to the location associated with the upcoming anticipated change in the mode of autonomous operations (e.g., “800 ft”).) the method further comprising, after outputting the takeover prompt information:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach in response to the distance between the location of the vehicle and the state switching point being shorter than a second distance threshold that is shorter than the first distance threshold, outputting, in a strong reminder manner, takeover alarm information, an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover alarm being higher than an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover prompt information.
Hattori is directed to method for providing notification to a driver for taking over driving, Hattori teaches in response to the distance between the location of the vehicle and the state switching point being shorter than a second distance threshold that is shorter than the first distance threshold, outputting, in a strong reminder manner, takeover alarm information, an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover alarm being higher than an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover prompt information. (see at least Fig. 5-6B [0055-0091]: the control system calculates the distance to the point at which automated driving is to be switched to manual driving, based on the current traveling state (speed, road condition, weather etc.). The control system determines whether or not the distance calculated falls below a predetermined threshold, if yes, the control system starts the notification at level one using preset alarm music. The control system determines whether or not the driving preparative action 1 performed by the driver has been detected. If so, the control system starts the notification at level 2 where the volume is varied as time passes and the type of sound of the musical instruments that constitute the alarm music is increased. If not, the control system performs an operation to urge the river to approve taking over the driving. Examples of the urging operation here may include, for example, increasing the volume of the alarm music that is currently output, and urging the driver to perform an operation to approve taking over of driving, using a screen display on the display device 92 or sound output by the sound output device 91. In addition, the seat belt of the driver seat on which the driver is seated may be vibrated, and the lighting in the vehicle may be adjusted. The driver's attention may be thus brought to driving (approval for taking over driving). )
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of outputting, in a strong reminder manner, takeover alarm information, an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover alarm being higher than an urgency level of taking over the vehicle corresponding to the takeover prompt information in response to the distance between the location of the vehicle and the state switching point being shorter than a second distance threshold that is shorter than the first distance threshold as taught by Hattori with reasonable expectation of success because increase an alert volume helps ensure the driver becomes aware of the immediate need to retake control as the vehicle nears the handover point to ensure safer and more comfortable re-engagement without panic reactions.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba, Chiba et al. (US 2019/0004513 A1 hereinafter Chiba) and Hattori.
Regarding Claim 10, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1,
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach wherein an output manner of the takeover prompt information is a speech output manner;
the method further comprising: in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information, a value of the volume being negatively correlated with the distance.
Chiba is directed to system and method for providing driving assistance, Chiba teaches wherein an output manner of the takeover prompt information is a speech output manner; (see at least Fig. 2-3 [0026-0063]: the traveling control unit gives a notification that warns that automatic driving will be cancelled and switched to manual driving through display or audio output by the notifying unit of a message that indicates that cancellation of automatic driving and transition to the manual driving is required to be performed by a certain time/distance (e.g. “prepare for cancellation of automatic driving and switching to manual driving within “o” km or seconds”)
the method further comprising: in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information, (see at least Fig. 2-3 [0026-0063]: The traveling control unit may out an audio message that warns the cancellation of automatic driving at a louder sound volume upon lowering the reproduction sound volume of the audio can be considered.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of outputting the takeover prompt information in a speech output manner and dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information as taught by Chiba with reasonable expectation of success and doing so would allow driver to receive information without shifting focus to better understanding the upcoming changes in a vehicle operations.
it may be alleged that Rockmore in view of Oba and Chiba does not explicitly teach the method further comprising: in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information, a value of the volume being negatively correlated with the distance.
Hattori is directed to method for providing notification to a driver for taking over driving, Hattori teaches the method further comprising: in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information, a value of the volume being negatively correlated with the distance. (see at least Fig. 5-6B [0055-0091]: the control system calculates the distance to the point at which automated driving is to be switched to manual driving, based on the current traveling state (speed, road condition, weather etc.). The control system determines whether or not the distance calculated falls below a predetermined threshold, if yes, the control system starts the notification at level one using preset alarm music. The control system determines whether or not the driving preparative action 1 performed by the driver has been detected. If so, the control system starts the notification at level 2 where the volume is varied as time passes and the type of sound of the musical instruments that constitute the alarm music is increased. If not, the control system performs an operation to urge the river to approve taking over the driving. Examples of the urging operation here may include, for example, increasing the volume of the alarm music that is currently output, and urging the driver to perform an operation to approve taking over of driving, using a screen display on the display device 92 or sound output by the sound output device 91. In addition, the seat belt of the driver seat on which the driver is seated may be vibrated, and the lighting in the vehicle may be adjusted. The driver's attention may be thus brought to driving (approval for taking over driving). )
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore, Oba and Chiba to incorporate the technique of dynamically adjusting a volume of the takeover prompt information, a value of the volume being negatively correlated with the distance as taught by Hattori with reasonable expectation of success because increase an alert volume helps ensure the driver becomes aware of the immediate need to retake control as the vehicle nears the handover point to ensure safer and more comfortable re-engagement without panic reactions.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba and Alders.
Regarding Claim 11, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1,
Rockmore further teaches when an output manner of the takeover prompt information is a text output manner (see at least Fig. 1-4); the method further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a font size of text corresponding to the takeover prompt information, the font size being negatively correlated with the distance.
Alders is directed to method and system for providing information using a navigation apparatus, Alders teaches in a process of outputting the takeover prompt information, dynamically adjusting a font size of text corresponding to the takeover prompt information, the font size being negatively correlated with the distance. (see at least Fig. 5-8b Abstract [0158-0188]: A visual or audible navigation instruction, warning or alert is provided to a user via the apparatus. The navigation instruction, warning or alert is enhanced in a continuous or stepped manner as a given location to which the instruction, warning or alert relates is approached. The instruction may be an instruction regarding a maneuver to be performed at a junction in order to follow a calculated route. The instruction is visually enhanced by increasing its size as the current location of the apparatus becomes closer to the junction to more readily engage the attention of the user, and to facilitate interpretation of the instruction.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of dynamically adjusting a font size of text corresponding to the prompt information, the font size being negatively correlated with the distance as taught by Alders with reasonable expectation of success to provide improved methods of providing navigation instructions, warnings or alerts using a navigation apparatus where the instruction is visually enhanced by increasing its size as the current location of the apparatus becomes closer to the junction to more readily engage the attention of the user, and to facilitate interpretation of the instruction (Alders, Abstract).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba, Miyahara et al. (US 2020/0231181 A1 hereinafter Miyahara).
Regarding Claim 12, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying a traveling progress bar of the vehicle in the assisted driving interface; and identifying a location in the traveling progress bar that corresponds to the state switching point.
Miyahara is directed to a system and method that manages switching between automatic operation and manual operation of a vehicle, Miyahara teaches displaying a traveling progress bar of the vehicle in the assisted driving interface; and identifying a location in the traveling progress bar that corresponds to the state switching point. (see at least Fig. 10-20)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings Of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying a traveling progress bar of the vehicle in the assisted driving interface and identifying a location in the traveling progress bar that corresponds to the state switching point as taught by Miyahara with reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved system that reduces the load of a driver when performing a switching from automatic driving of a vehicle to a manual driving (Miyahara [0007]).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba, Moore et al. (US 2020/0256692 A1 hereinafter Moore).
Regarding Claim 13, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising, after displaying the navigation map:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying an exit control corresponding to the navigation map; and
cancelling display of the navigation map in response to a trigger operation on the exit control.
Moore is directed to vehicular navigation map display, Moore teaches displaying an exit control corresponding to the navigation map; (see at least Fig. 2, 5 [0081-0094, 0128]: the home button enables the user of the mobile device to exit an application and return to a home page of the device. The user can touch the home button to return to a home page of the vehicle user interface.) and
cancelling display of the navigation map in response to a trigger operation on the exit control. (see at least Fig. 2, 0128 [0081-0094]: the home button enables the user of the mobile device to exit an application and return to a home page of the device. The user can touch the home button to return to a home page of the vehicle user interface.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying an exit control corresponding to the navigation map and cancelling display of the navigation map in response to a trigger operation on the exit control as taught by Moore with reasonable expectation of success and doing so would allow user to efficiently utilize other application when navigation map display is not needed.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockmore in view of Oba, Terai et al. (US 2011/0160996 A1 hereinafter Terai).
Regarding Claim 14, The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
The combination of Rockmore in view of Oba does not explicitly teach displaying a map mode switching control; and while the navigation map is being displayed, switching a map mode of the navigation map from a first map mode to a second map mode in response to a trigger operation on the map mode switching control.
Terai is directed to system and method for providing navigation assistance, Terai teaches displaying a map mode switching control; and while the navigation map is being displayed, switching a map mode of the navigation map from a first map mode to a second map mode in response to a trigger operation on the map mode switching control. (see at least Fig. 1, 4-5 [0029-0044]: The user can select a desired navigation mode from multiple navigation modes by pressing a navigation mode switching button or the like on the navigation device.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Rockmore and Oba to incorporate the technique of displaying a map mode switching control and while the navigation map is being displayed, switching a map mode of the navigation map from a first map mode to a second map mode in response to a trigger operation on the map mode switching control as taught by Terai with reasonable expectation of success to provide a new and improved navigation method capable of switching to various navigation modes which the user desires (Terai [0007]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA F ARTIMEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3410. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 am-3:30 pm EST.
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, Faris S. Almatrahi can be reached at (313) 446-4821. 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.
/DANA F ARTIMEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/FARIS S ALMATRAHI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights