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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: [0005] recites “However…the radio signal, .” should recite “However…the radio signal[[, ]].”
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12122364. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims recite similar subject matter with only minor variations.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10967856. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims recite similar subject matter with only minor variations.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 10377374. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims recite similar subject matter with only minor variations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 11, 13-16, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1531444 A2 (“Holzner”) in view of Augmenting the Floating Car Data Approach by Dynamic Indirect Traffic Detection, 2012 (“Ruppe”) and US 20140045556 (“Subramanian”).
As per claim(s) 1, Holzner discloses a method comprising:
transmitting, by a vehicle, a device-discovery radio signal in an environment of the vehicle using a radio technology (see at least [0001] detection device having a receiving means which detects this signal and which has a signal-evaluating processing device communicates, via which one or more vehicle-side third-party objects can be controlled depending on the information content of the signal, [0011] marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination, and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination, [0021] a detection device 3…This has a receiving means 15, but also a transmitting means 18…radio signal is transmitted continuously or intermittently via the transmitting means 18. If a marking 4 is within signal range, the radio signal is received by the receiving means 19 and this triggers the operation of the transmitting means 16 to give a response radio signal. The response radio signal is in turn received by the receiving means 15 of the detection device 3 and forwarded accordingly);
receiving, at the vehicle, a responsive radio signal from a device situated externally to the vehicle (see at least [0010], [0011] marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination, and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination, [0012], [0021] a detection device 3…This has a receiving means 15, but also a transmitting means 18…radio signal is transmitted continuously or intermittently via the transmitting means 18. If a marking 4 is within signal range, the radio signal is received by the receiving means 19 and this triggers the operation of the transmitting means 16 to give a response radio signal. The response radio signal is in turn received by the receiving means 15 of the detection device 3 and forwarded accordingly);
based on the responsive radio signal, determining that the device is a pedestrian device (see at least [0015]: it is expedient if the radio signal contains at least one object-specific information, in particular about the type of object. This means that information is impressed on the radio signal, e.g. B. about the type of object (person, street sign, etc.), possibly also about the size and outline and the like, i.e. information that is useful with regard to the reaction that takes place on the part of the processing device to the radio signal, [0018] basis of a radio signal emitted by the marking 4, which is received by the detection device 3 via suitable receiving means and processed in a downstream processing device 6…the type of object, provided that the given radio signal contains information in this regard); and
controlling the vehicle based on determining that the device is the pedestrian device (see at least [0007], [0008], [0009] depending on the signal via the processing device, the hood can be raised in a controlled manner in order to reduce personal injury as much as possible in the event of a collision of the motor vehicle with a pedestrian or cyclist, [0015] it is very useful to know at an early stage whether the object is a moving object, for example a pedestrian, since the lifting mechanism for the hood then needs to be activated if necessary, [0018] processing device 6 controls one or more third-party objects depending on the detection result…emergency braking, as shown by symbol 9, as well as activating the hazard warning lights…conceivable to turn on the horn to warn the person).
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose that the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
Holzner discloses determining a distance to the object (see at least [0014]: determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals) but does not explicitly disclose receiving, at the vehicle, motion data from the device.
However, Subramanian teaches receiving, at the vehicle, motion data from the device (see at least [0012]: pedestrians using the road may use their cellphone devices to transmit their position and movement to vehicles/other pedestrians devices in the neighborhood so that the vehicle may avoid the pedestrian users and/or pedestrians can have an idea of congestion and/or other information useful in determining a safe and fast route).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Subramanian with a reasonable expectation of success in order that the vehicle may avoid the pedestrian users and improve safety. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claims 14 and 18 recite similar claim limitations and are rejected under the same rationale.
As per claim(s) 2, Holzner discloses wherein the receiving of data occurs along with the receiving of the responsive radio signal, but does not explicitly disclose the motion data.
However, Subramanian teaches the motion data (see at least [0011]: dedicated short range communications (DSRC), [0012]: pedestrians using the road may use their cellphone devices to transmit their position and movement to vehicles/other pedestrians devices in the neighborhood so that the vehicle may avoid the pedestrian users and/or pedestrians can have an idea of congestion and/or other information useful in determining a safe and fast route).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Subramanian with a reasonable expectation of success in order that the vehicle may avoid the pedestrian users and improve safety. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claims 16 and 19 recite similar claim limitations and are rejected under the same rationale.
As per claim(s) 3, Holzner does not explicitly disclose wherein transmitting the device-discovery radio signal in the environment of the vehicle using the radio technology comprises: transmitting a plurality of device-discovery radio signals on a plurality of channels.
However, Ruppe teaches wherein transmitting the device-discovery radio signal in the environment of the vehicle using the radio technology comprises: transmitting a plurality of device-discovery radio signals on a plurality of channels (see at least page 3 section 2.1: Bluetooth devices communicate in the license free ISM band around 2.4 GHz using 79 frequencies of 1 MHz bandwidth each…implementation of the Bluetooth standard is the worldwide unique identification code of every Bluetooth device – the 12 digit hexadecimal coded MAC address – which is particularly sent out by any Bluetooth device periodically, when the device is looking for a slave (partner) to connect with. This procedure is called inquiry process…To ensure that the inquiry device B hits the specific random inquiry scan frequency of device A in the first scan round, the inquiry package has to be send on all 32 possible inquiry frequencies within the inquiry scan window of 11.25 ms, page 9 section 5: approach is based on a method for anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 5, Holzner discloses based on receiving the responsive radio signal from the device, determining a distance between the vehicle and the device and a direction of the device relative to the vehicle (see at least [0014]: determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals…not only location information, i.e. direction information, but also distance information can be recorded).
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose that the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 6, Holzner discloses wherein controlling the vehicle based on determining that the device is the pedestrian device comprises:
adjusting a trajectory of the vehicle and a speed of the vehicle based on the distance between the vehicle and the device and the direction of the device relative to the vehicle (see at least [0007]-[0008], [0009] depending on the signal via the processing device, the hood can be raised in a controlled manner in order to reduce personal injury as much as possible in the event of a collision of the motor vehicle with a pedestrian or cyclist, [0014] detection device or the processing device is designed to determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals, [0015], [0018] processing device 6 controls one or more third-party objects depending on the detection result…emergency braking).
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose that the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 7, Holzner discloses wherein determining that the device is the pedestrian device comprises using information in the responsive radio signal received from the device as a basis to determine that the device is the pedestrian device rather than another type of device (see at least [0015]: it is expedient if the radio signal contains at least one object-specific information, in particular about the type of object. This means that information is impressed on the radio signal, e.g. B. about the type of object (person, street sign, etc.), possibly also about the size and outline and the like, i.e. information that is useful with regard to the reaction that takes place on the part of the processing device to the radio signal, [0018] basis of a radio signal emitted by the marking 4, which is received by the detection device 3 via suitable receiving means and processed in a downstream processing device 6…the type of object, provided that the given radio signal contains information in this regard).
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 11, Holzner discloses controlling the vehicle based on determining that the device is the pedestrian device further comprises adjusting a trajectory of the vehicle based on the distance (see at least [0009] depending on the signal via the processing device, the hood can be raised in a controlled manner in order to reduce personal injury as much as possible in the event of a collision of the motor vehicle with a pedestrian or cyclist, [0014] detection device or the processing device is designed to determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals, [0015], [0018] processing device 6 controls one or more third-party objects depending on the detection result…emergency braking) but does not explicitly disclose wherein controlling the vehicle based on determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device further comprises adjusting a trajectory of the vehicle further based on the motion data.
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
However, Subramanian teaches wherein controlling the vehicle based on determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device further comprises adjusting a trajectory of the vehicle further based on the motion data (see at least [0003]: safety messages to indicate their position and velocity on the road, [0012]: pedestrians using the road may use their cellphone devices to transmit their position and movement to vehicles/other pedestrians devices in the neighborhood so that the vehicles may avoid the pedestrian users and/or pedestrians can have an idea of congestion and/or other information useful in determining a safe and fast route, [0063]: step 250 the communications device receives a message from a vehicle requesting pedestrians to send safety messages. Operation proceeds from step 250 to step 252. In step 252 the communications device transmits at least one safety message in response to said received message from a vehicle requesting pedestrians to send safety messages. In some embodiments, the received message from the vehicle requesting pedestrians to send safety messages includes information communicating safety message periodicity information and/or safety message transmission power information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Subramanian with a reasonable expectation of success in order that the vehicle may avoid the pedestrian users and improve safety. The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 13, Holzner discloses receiving a responsive radio signal from a device; and determining that a computing device is a pedestrian device based on the responsive radio signal; wherein the device is a first device and the responsive radio signal is a first responsive radio signal (see at least [0014], [0018]) but does not explicitly disclose a second device is a pedestrian device.
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)), and
receiving a second signal from a second computing device; and determining that the second computing device is a pedestrian device based on the second signal (see at least abstract, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used), page 3 section 2.1 Bluetooth Standard & Inquiry Process, Fig. 4: detection of traffic objects by the Bluetooth-MTOU in the red car; Examiner note: Fig. 4 shows a first person with a device and a second person with a device as traffic objects detected by the Bluetooth-MTOU in the red car, Fig. 2 shows a key of the blue graphic shown in Fig. 4 as Communications (e.g., with Bluetooth)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings including many traffic participants of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim(s) 15, Holzner discloses based on receiving the responsive radio signal from the device, determining a distance between the vehicle and the device and a direction of the device relative to the vehicle (see at least [0014]: determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals…not only location information, i.e. direction information, but also distance information can be recorded),
wherein controlling the vehicle based on determining that the device is the pedestrian device comprises: adjusting a trajectory of the vehicle and a speed of the vehicle based on the distance between the vehicle and the device and the direction of the device relative to the vehicle (see at least [0007]-[0008], [0009] depending on the signal via the processing device, the hood can be raised in a controlled manner in order to reduce personal injury as much as possible in the event of a collision of the motor vehicle with a pedestrian or cyclist, [0014] detection device or the processing device is designed to determine the distance to the object on the basis of the transmission signals given by the transmission means of the detection device and the received radio signal or signals, [0015], [0018] processing device 6 controls one or more third-party objects depending on the detection result…emergency braking).
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose that the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches a computing device (see at least page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 4, 17, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzner in view of Ruppe and Subramanian, and further in view of DE 102006048779 A1 (“Andersen”).
As per claim(s) 4, 17, 20, Holzner does not explicitly disclose wherein transmitting the plurality of device-discovery radio signals on the plurality of channels comprises: transmitting a first device-discovery radio signal on a first channel; and transmitting a second device-discovery radio signal on a second channel without waiting for a response signal after transmitting the first device-discovery radio signal.
However, Andersen teaches wherein transmitting the plurality of device-discovery radio signals on the plurality of channels comprises: transmitting a first device-discovery radio signal on a first channel; and transmitting a second device-discovery radio signal on a second channel without waiting for a response signal after transmitting the first device-discovery radio signal (see at least abstract, [0002] Possible road users of the traffic flows that can be recorded and analyzed using the method according to the invention are, for example, pedestrians, cyclists, car users and public transport passengers, [0047], [0050] Fig. 4 shows a modification of the inquiry process using two Bluetooth modules, which enables faster detection of the devices in the environment: As can be seen from Fig. 3, there is the possibility that the master transmits on train A frequencies, while the slave is ready to receive on a frequency that belongs to Train B. In order to avoid the resulting waiting times, two masters are used instead of one. The two devices are synchronized in such a way that both trains are used at any time. Depending on the current frequency of the slave, it is recognized by Master 1 or Master 2 without having to wait for a change in the current frequency range. A considerable reduction in the inquiry time can therefore be expected, whereby a high level of reliability in determining traffic flows can be ensured, even with moving devices, for example due to flow of traffic).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Andersen with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide traffic flow analysis cost effectively. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzner in view of Ruppe and Subramanian, and further in view of US 20060224300 (“Shioya”).
As per claim(s) 8, Holzner does not explicitly disclose using the information in the responsive radio signal received from the device as a basis to determine that the device is the pedestrian device rather than another type of device (see at least [0015], [0018]: pedestrian).
Holzner does not explicitly disclose wherein using the information in the responsive radio signal received from the computing device as a basis to determine that the computing device is the pedestrian device rather than another type of device comprises: determining, based on the information, that the computing device is a mobile device; and based on the determining that the computing device is a mobile device, determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device.
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches determining, based on the information, that the computing device is a mobile device (see at least abstract: many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). Example: a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wifi-receivers, detects all traffic objects, which are in the detection area, by their Bluetooth/WiFi identification number, page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 8 section 4: identified car(s) have the same average speed as the measuring car, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
However, Shioya teaches based on the determining that the computing device is a mobile device, determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device (see at least [0057]: When it is found that the current speed and the maximum speed are both the predetermined value V.sub.2 such as 200 m/min. or less (No at step S36), the information processing unit 30 determines that the person who is carrying the mobile phone is the pedestrian (at step S37)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Shioya with a reasonable expectation of success in order to determine an estimated state and help reduce a risk of a traffic accident. The combination would yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzner in view of Ruppe and Subramanian, and further in view of Andersen and US 20020175862 (“Hunter”).
As per claim(s) 9, Holzner does not explicitly disclose wherein transmitting the device-discovery radio signal in the environment of the vehicle using the radio technology comprises: transmitting the device-discovery radio signal is on all frequency channels of the radio technology using a sensor unit having a plurality of antennas, wherein each antenna is configured to send and receive signals in a specific direction.
However, Andersen teaches wherein transmitting the device-discovery radio signal in the environment of the vehicle using the radio technology comprises: transmitting the device-discovery radio signal is transmitted on 32 frequency channels of the radio technology using a sensor unit having a plurality of antennas, wherein each antenna is configured to send and receive signals in a specific direction (see at least abstract, [0002] Possible road users of the traffic flows that can be recorded and analyzed using the method according to the invention are, for example, pedestrians, cyclists, car users and public transport passengers, [0011] it can be provided that directional antennas are used when determining the characteristic data, which can ensure that essentially only devices in the predetermined detection range are detected, [0039], [0047], [0049] p-master basically uses 32 of the 79 possible frequencies in the recognition process, whereby these are divided into two frequency groups (trains) of 16 each. It cycles through the 16 frequencies at double speed (3200 hops per second) and repeats them at least 256 times before switching to the other frequency group. The p-master sends out inquiry packets on each frequency., [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Andersen with a reasonable expectation of success in order to ensure that essentially only devices in the predetermined detection range are detected.
However, Hunter teaches wherein transmitting the device-discovery radio signal in the environment of the vehicle using the radio technology comprises: transmitting the device-discovery radio signal is transmitted on all frequency channels of the radio technology using a sensor unit having a plurality of antennas, wherein each antenna is configured to send and receive signals in a specific direction (see at least abstract, [007] system uses 1 MHz frequency hopping steps to switch among 79 frequencies in the Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) 2.4 GHz band at 1,600 hops per second, with different hopping sequences used to distinguish different channels, [0028] Each antenna element in the design operates independently and sees the other two antenna elements as potential interferers. The advantage of the design is two-fold: The isolation between each element means that three independent Bluetooth radios can be collocated in the array, thus reducing the number of local access devices required; and the unique directional nature of each of the antenna elements (approximately 60.degree. beam width) means that each signal is only transmitted in one direction, thus reducing the level of unwanted interference in other directions and increasing the user density that can be supported.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Hunter with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the level of unwanted interference in other directions.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzner in view of Ruppe and Subramanian, and further in view of US 20120143493 (“Tang”).
As per claim(s) 10, Holzner does not explicitly disclose wherein determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device comprises: receiving sensor data from a vehicle sensor; and determining that the computing device is the pedestrian device based on the responsive radio signal and the sensor data.
Holzner discloses that the marking is designed as a transmitter-receiver combination and the detection device also has a transmitter-receiver combination (see at least [0011]) but Holzner does not explicitly disclose the device is a computing device.
However, Ruppe teaches determining, based on the information, that the computing device is a mobile device (see at least abstract: many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). Example: a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wifi-receivers, detects all traffic objects, which are in the detection area, by their Bluetooth/WiFi identification number, page 3 section 1: indirect detection of traffic objects (cars, cyclists, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies, e.g. Bluetooth/Wi-Fi. This is advantageous, since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g. mobile phones, headsets). Imagine a car, which is equipped with specific Bluetooth/Wi-Fi-receivers, detects all traffic objects with Bluetooth/Wi-Fi devices, which are in the detection area, by their identification number. This identification number is augmented by the time stamps and positions of the detecting objects. The measured data is processed to trajectories, travel times, traffic states, origin-destination matrices and other important traffic parameters, page 6 section 3.2.2: module consists in this case of a Bluetooth transceiver device to detect the MAC addresses of the traffic participants, who are equipped with corresponding Bluetooth devices, page 8 section 4: identified car(s) have the same average speed as the measuring car, page 9 section 5: anonymous positioning by dynamic indirect traffic detection of traffic objects (e.g. vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) using wireless radio-based technologies (here Bluetooth was used)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Holzner by incorporating the teachings of Ruppe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide an efficient and low-cost large-scale traffic monitoring that enables anonymous positioning of traffic objects using radio based Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technologies since many traffic participants use devices with activated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi functionality (e.g., mobile phones, headsets). The combination would yield predictable results.
However, Tang teaches wherein determining that the device is the pedestrian device comprises: receiving sensor data from a vehicle sensor; and determining that the device is the pedestrian device based on the responsive radio signal and the sensor data (see at least [0065], [0067]: Cameras can be mounted on vehicles and towers to help identify vehicles, pedestrians, and objects. Information on the road hindrance 216 can be collected and displayed on the display interface 202, [0143]: Vehicles and pedestrians can be equipped with radio frequency identification to determine their location in the vehicle environment 214. For example, the pedestrian