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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed 31 March 2026. The Applicant has amended claims 16-20, 22, 24-25, 27 and 31. Claims 1-15 were previously canceled. Claims 16-31 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Reply to Applicant’s Remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed 31 March 2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Objections to Drawings:
Applicant’s amendment to the Drawings filed 31 March 2026 have overcome the Objections previously set forth.
Claim Interpretations under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed 31 March 2026 have avoid the limitations being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) previously set forth.
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112:
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed 31 March 2026 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections previously set forth.
Claims Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102/103:
Applicant’s arguments, see Arguments/Remarks, filed 31 March 2026, with regard to the rejections of claims 16-31 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered. Applicant’s argument is moot because the argument is directed toward new limitations that have not been previously considered. As such, Applicant’s amendment has necessitated a new ground of rejection set forth in this office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 16 recites “…an electronic control unit (ECU) configured to process sensor signals…” which is not explicitly, implicitly or inherently disclosed in the specification. The Specification recites “…wherein the driver assistance system includes a control unit for processing sensor signals”, while there is no support for the control unit to be an ECU in the specification. Therefore, the amended claim recites new matter and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Similarly, claim 19 recites “ECU” and is rejected for similar reasons above.
Claim 22 recites “…filter the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor to remove wind noise at vehicle speeds up to 50 km/h” …” which is not explicitly, implicitly or inherently disclosed in the specification. The Specification recites “…up to a measuring speed of about 50 km/h”, while there is no support for the measuring speed being “vehicle speeds” in the specification. Therefore, the amended claim recites new matter and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claims 17-23 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 16.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites “…includes simulated sound signals reproducing sounds originating at respective locations in the simulated environment from a perspective of one or more acoustic audible sound sensors of the driver assistance system” which is ambiguous. It is not clear how the “simulated sound signal” is “from…sound sensors” since “sensors” are used to receive sound signal instead of produce sound signal. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The claim is interpreted by the Examiner as “…includes simulated sound signals reproducing sounds originating at respective locations in the simulated environment” for the purpose of examination.
Claims 17-23 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 16.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 16-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aono (US20220402515) in view of Marlett (US20230083999) and of Shuji (JP2012246744, paragraph numbers are cited based on the attached machine translated copy) and further in view of OH (US20230197053).
As to claim 16, Aono teaches a system for testing a driver assistance system for an automotive vehicle (Aono, abstract, Fig. 2), the system including:
a test stand configured in such a way that the driver assistance system, in particular together with a drive train for the automotive vehicle, wherein the driver assistance system is operable on the test stand (Aono Fig. 2 and related text; also see para 0072: the vehicle inspection system 10 inspects each function of a driving assistance vehicle);
a simulation device configured to simulate an environment of the automotive vehicle (Aono para 32: the computing apparatus controls the monitor apparatus 80 and the target apparatus 100, in order to reproduce a virtual outdoor environment that simulates an outdoor environment, Fig. 2); and
a first interface that provides the simulated to the driver assistance system, the driver assistance system including an electronic control unit (ECU) configured to process sensor signals and to control the automotive vehicle based at least in part on the sensor signals (Aono para 0043-0052: a virtual outdoor environment showing a scene without obstacles (6A) is reproduced by the simulator apparatus. The simulator apparatus reproduces this travel scene without obstacles based on the virtual outdoor environment information, and displays an image of the reproduced scene in the monitor... The camera of the vehicle captures the image displayed in the monitor… vehicle control apparatus controls acceleration and deceleration according to the manipulation of the acceleration pedal and brake pedal by the worker, and controls steering such that the vehicle travels in the center of the travel lane based on the detection results of the outside sensor…; Fig. 5).
Anon does not teach …a simulation device comprising a processor configured to execute simulation software to simulate an environment of the automotive vehicle, the simulated environment comprising a simulated acoustic audible sound environment.
Marlett is directed to a vehicle control system employing acoustic and impact sensors for sensing acoustics and vibrations at a vehicle to detect environmental conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control and driver warnings according to the environmental conditions. Marlett teaches the acoustic sensor may be any sensor configured to detect airborne sounds in the external environment in which the vehicle operates… each sensor among the plurality of sensors may be communicatively coupled to one or more vehicle control systems of the vehicle (Marlett para 0021, para 0030, para 0050, Fig. 3, Fig. 6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include a driver assistance system with an acoustic audible sound sensor… sensor signals received from the acoustic audible sound sensor in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. Those having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the vehicle control system employing acoustic and impact sensors of Marlett can be inspected in the vehicle inspection system of Aono, as required by the claim. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
Shuji is directed to a driving simulation device. Shuji teaches a speaker is provided to output sounds generated within the images displayed on the display…the user can hear engine sounds and driving sounds…driving sounds of other vehicles… (Shuji para 0030)…the speaker outputs sounds…of other cars driving in the virtual reality, horns, and railroad crossing gate warning sound…( Shuji para 0043).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include the simulated environment comprising an acoustic audible sound environment… provides the simulated environment including the acoustic audible sound environment in view of Shuji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. Those having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the speaker outputting sounds…of the environment such as other cars driving in the virtual reality… of Shuji can be used in Aono, as required by the claim. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Shuji because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
OH is directed a method for simulating a noise environment of a vehicle. OH teaches the simulation system 30 according to one embodiment of the present disclosure simulates a noise environment of a vehicle. The noise control system 32 receives signals related to noise inside the vehicle from the simulation system 30 and generates a noise control signal for controlling or eliminating the noise. The noise control system 32 may correspond to the components of the vehicle or the audio system described in FIGS. 1 and 2… (OH para 0105-0109, para 0023) …the method being implemented as hardware or software…(OH para 0165-0166).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include execute simulation software to…that includes simulated sound signals reproducing sounds originating at respective locations in the simulated environment from a perspective of one or more acoustic audible sound sensors of the driver assistance system in view of OH et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. Those having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the simulated acoustic environment of OH can be used in Aono, as required by the claim. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and OH because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
As to claim 17, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 16.
Shuji further teaches wherein the first interface is a stimulation device configured to stimulate environment sensors and includes at least two sound transducers for audible sound, the at least two sound transducers configured to generate a surround sound that reproduces the simulated environment on the test stand around the automotive vehicle (Shuji Fig. 1 and related text, particularly element 31, i.e., speakers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the first interface is a stimulation device configured to stimulate environment sensors and includes at least two sound transducers for audible sound, the at least two sound transducers configured to generate a surround sound that reproduces the simulated environment on the test stand around the automotive vehicle in view of Shuji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Shuji because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
As to claim 18, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 16.
Aono further teaches vehicle inspection system that inspects a driving assistance system (Aono para 0005).
Marlett further teaches acoustic sensors (Marlett para 0021, para 0030, para 0050, Fig. 3, Fig. 6-7).
Shuji further teaches wherein the first interface is a data interface configured to provide the driver assistance system, in particular the acoustic audible sound sensor, with a simulated environment as a signal, in particular as an output signal of the acoustic audible sound sensor, or data stream (Shuji para 0030, para 0043, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include teaches wherein the first interface is a data interface configured to provide the driver assistance system, in particular the acoustic audible sound sensor, with a simulated environment as a signal, in particular as an output signal of the acoustic audible sound sensor, or data stream in view of Shuji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Shuji because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
As to claim 19, Aono in view of Marlett and Shuji teaches the system of claim 16.
Marlett further teaches a measuring assembly that includes the automotive vehicle with the driver assistance system, wherein the driver assistance system includes the control unit for processing sensor signals, the control unit being configured to process sensor signals from environment sensors and to control the automotive vehicle based on the sensor signals (Marlett para 0030: the acoustic sensor may be any sensor configured to detect airborne sounds in the external environment in which the vehicle operates… each sensor among the plurality of sensors may be communicatively coupled to one or more vehicle control systems of the vehicle; , para 0042-0050: …values output by the acoustic sensor representing detected sound…analyzing the values output by the plurality of sensors…one or more vehicle control actions to be performed , Fig. 3, Fig. 6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include a measuring assembly that includes the automotive vehicle with the driver assistance system, wherein the driver assistance system includes the control unit for processing sensor signals, the control unit being configured to process sensor signals from environment sensors and to control the automotive vehicle based on the sensor signals in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 20, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 16.
Aono further teaches The storage apparatus of the simulator apparatus 72 stores, in addition to various programs, virtual outdoor environment information 74 for simulating the outdoor environment (Aono para 0032).
Marlett further teaches a measuring vehicle for generating sensor data of an environment of the measuring vehicle, wherein the environment comprises an acoustic audible sound environment and the measuring vehicle comprises: environment sensors, wherein at least one of the environment sensors is an audible sound sensor (Marlett para 0021, para 0030, para 0050, Fig. 3, Fig. 6-7); and a data processing unit for processing sensor signals, the data processing unit being configured to process sensor signals of the environment sensors (Marlett Fig. 3 and related text, also see Fig. 6-7); a data storage configured to record the sensor data, in particular with a frequency of approximately 10 Hz (Marlett para 0037-0038: the datastore may store a record associated with each sensor…also see para 0057, para 0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include a measuring vehicle for generating sensor data of an environment of the measuring vehicle, wherein the environment comprises an acoustic audible sound environment and the measuring vehicle comprises: environment sensors, wherein at least one of the environment sensors is an audible sound sensor; and a data processing unit for processing sensor signals, the data processing unit being configured to process sensor signals of the environment sensors; a data storage configured to record the sensor data, in particular with a frequency of approximately 10 Hz in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
Shuji further teaches wherein the data processing unit is further configured to synchronize the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor with the sensor data of the other environment sensors (Shuji para 0030: a speaker is provided to output sounds generated within the images displayed on the display…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the data processing unit is further configured to synchronize the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor with the sensor data of the other environment sensors in view of Shuji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Shuji because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
As to claim 21, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 20.
Marlett further teaches wherein the data processing unit is further configured to: determine characteristic noises from the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor (Marlett para 0087: driving next to another vehicle, wall, guardrail, or other object will generate additional noise reflected to the sensors. Accordingly, the sensor system may utilize data output by sensors on an opposite side of the vehicle to isolate only the road surface noise, also see para 0049-0050, 0060-0062); determine an acoustic source of the characteristic noises (Marlett para 0032: an algorithm can determine the road surface condition based on the sound of the road noise in combination with the speed of travel, engine speed, and the proximity to other objects, also see para 0049-0050, para 0060-0061); and label the characteristic noises accordingly (Marlett para 0032: an algorithm can determine the road surface condition based on the sound of the road noise in combination with the speed of travel, engine speed, and the proximity to other objects, also see para 0049-0050, para 0060-0061).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the data processing unit is further configured to: determine characteristic noises from the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor; determine an acoustic source of the characteristic noises; and label the characteristic noises accordingly in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 22, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 20.
Marlett further teaches wherein the data processing unit is further configured to filter the sensor data of the acoustic audible sound sensor to remove wind noise at vehicle speeds up to 50 km/h (Marlett para 0087: …utilize data output by sensors on an opposite side of the vehicle to isolate only the road surface noise; also see para 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include the above limitations in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 23, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the system of claim 21.
Marlett further teaches wherein the data processing unit is further configured to determine at least one speed or distance characteristic for the acoustic source selected from a group comprising: a distance of the acoustic source from the measuring vehicle; a direction from which the characteristic noises originate with respect to the measuring vehicle; or a differential speed of the acoustic source with respect to the measuring vehicle; and wherein the data processing unit is configured to record the at least one speed or distance characteristic in the sensor data (Marlett para 0051: winds detected…a direction of the winds, para 0037: The datastore may store a record associated with each sensor of the plurality of sensors. Each record may include fields of information associated with the sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the data processing unit is further configured to determine at least one speed or distance characteristic for the acoustic source selected from a group comprising: a distance of the acoustic source from the measuring vehicle; a direction from which the characteristic noises originate with respect to the measuring vehicle; or a differential speed of the acoustic source with respect to the measuring vehicle; and wherein the data processing unit is configured to record the at least one speed or distance characteristic in the sensor data in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 24, Claim 24 a process claim (a method) includes limitations analogous to claim 16, an apparatus process claim (a system). For the reasons give above with respect to claim 16, claim 24 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Aono in combination with Marlett, Shuji and OH.
As to claim 25, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 24.
Marlett further teaches using the data stream to stimulate the acoustic audible sound sensor to produce corresponding sensor output data, and providing that output data to the driver assistance system (Marlett para 0030: …the acoustic sensor may be any sensor configured to detect airborne sounds in the external environment in which the vehicle operates… each sensor among the plurality of sensors may be communicatively coupled to one or more vehicle control systems of the vehicle, also see para 0050, Fig. 3, Fig. 6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include the above limitations in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 26, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 24.
Shuji further teaches wherein the data stream is output as surround sound which reproduces the acoustic audible sound environment on a test stand to stimulate the acoustic audible sound sensors, the automotive vehicle being operable on the test stand (Shuji Fig. 1, element 31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the data stream is output as surround sound which reproduces the acoustic audible sound environment on a test stand to stimulate the acoustic audible sound sensors, the automotive vehicle being operable on the test stand in view of Shuji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Shuji because this would have achieved the desirable result of generating a more realistic driving environment to test the vehicle driving system for better vehicle and vehicle subsystem design so as to improve driving safety.
As to claim 27, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 24.
Anno further teaches monitoring an activity of the driver assistance system; and adapting the simulation of the environment of the automotive vehicle based on detection of the activity (Aono para 0045: The simulator apparatus 72 calculates a movement amount and a progression direction of the vehicle 200 based on the vehicle velocity V detected by the vehicle velocity sensor 28 and the steering angle 8s detected by the wheel position sensor 30. The simulator apparatus 72 then moves the vehicle 200 in the virtual outdoor environment according to the calculated movement amount and progression direction, and reproduces the virtual outdoor environment near an after-movement position).
As to claim 28, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 24.
Marlett further teaches degrading the data stream (Marlett, para 0087: driving next to another vehicle, wall, guardrail, or other object will generate additional noise reflected to the sensors, para 0079-0081: If the road condition or the weather condition is classified as a normal condition in step 560, then the sensor system may determine whether vehicle noise floor data of the vehicle is nominal in step 570. If the vehicle noise floor data of the vehicle is not nominal in step 570, then the sensor system may incrementally update reference vehicle noise data, for example to adjust for vehicle aging, Fig. 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include degrading the data stream in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 29, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 28.
Marlett further teaches wherein the data stream is degraded based on weather conditions or defects in hardware of an environment sensor (Marlett, para 0079-0081: If the road condition or the weather condition is classified as a normal condition in step 560, then the sensor system may determine whether vehicle noise floor data of the vehicle is nominal in step 570. If the vehicle noise floor data of the vehicle is not nominal in step 570, then the sensor system may incrementally update reference vehicle noise data, for example to adjust for vehicle aging, Fig. 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aono so as to include wherein the data stream is degraded based on weather conditions or defects in hardware of an environment sensor in view of Marlett et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Aono and Marlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of inspecting the driving function of the vehicle including the sensing and control system which are critical in detecting the environment conditions and provide appropriate vehicle control correspondingly so as to improve driving safety (Marlett para 0001).
As to claim 30, Aono in view of Marlett, Shuji and OH teaches the method of claim 24.
Aono further teaches operating a drive train for the automotive vehicle based on the simulated environment (Aono para 0043-0044, Fig. 5, Fig. 7 and related text).
As to claim 31, Claim 31 an apparatus claim (one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media) includes limitations analogous to claim 16, an apparatus process claim (a system). For the reasons give above with respect to claim 16, claim 31 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Aono in combination with Marlett, Shuji and OH.
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.
Examiner’s Notes
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP §2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as "Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced" may be deemed insufficient.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HONGYE LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5410. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on 571-272-4896. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HONGYE LIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights