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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II directed to claims 9-20 in the reply filed on 12/30/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/26/2024 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9-10, 12-14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lahti (US 2021/0213948 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Lahti discloses a method for improving the safety of vehicles comprising:
receiving sensor data from one or more sensors of a first vehicle by a computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0025], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 implementing the predictive adaptive cruise control techniques disclosed herein is a processor-based system, such as an embedded system, that includes one or more processors 112 that are communicatively coupled to receive measurements from sensors on the vehicle measuring operational characteristics of the vehicle, such as vehicle speed, crankshaft rotational speed, driveshaft rotational speed, transmission speed sensor, and brake pressure; in paragraph [0029], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 further includes or is coupled with one or more sensors 120 that are configured to measure distance to adjacent vehicles or objects around the vehicle, in particular, the one or more sensors 120 are positioned and configured to measure a distance to an adjacent vehicle ahead of the vehicle and behind the vehicle in which the cruise control system 110 is installed);
based on the received sensor data from the one or more sensors, determining that a second vehicle is traveling behind the first vehicle by the computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0029], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 further includes or is coupled with one or more sensors 120 that are configured to measure distance to adjacent vehicles or objects around the vehicle, in particular, the one or more sensors 120 are positioned and configured to measure a distance to an adjacent vehicle ahead of the vehicle and behind the vehicle in which the cruise control system 110 is installed);
establishing a connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle by the computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0050], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may, for example, determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road; in paragraph [0126], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804);
receiving second vehicle data from the second vehicle via the connection by the computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0036], Lahti discloses that each cruise control system 110 may generate speed trajectory information based on speed trajectory information received from other vehicles of the plurality vehicles 102; in paragraph [0125], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804);
using some or all of the received second vehicle data, first vehicle data from the first vehicle, and the received sensor data, determining that one or more collision conditions are satisfied by the computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraphs [0050-0051], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road, where for instance, the cruise control system 110 of the vehicle 210 may be configured to generate a following distance profile that does not include a following distance less than a defined minimum following distance to the adjacent vehicle ahead, and the defined minimum following distance of the vehicle 210, in some embodiments, may be specific to the vehicle 210 based on, e.g., weight of the vehicle 210 and a load towed thereby, engine retarder torque, weather conditions, and/or brake system configuration; in paragraph [0063], Lahti discloses that the predicted speed trajectory information 318 may be constrained according to a defined minimum following distance for the following vehicle 304, as described with respect to the predicted speed trajectory information 218 of FIG. 2 and elsewhere herein, for instance, a programmed constraint of the cruise control system 110 may specify that the following distances of the following distance profile cannot be smaller than a minimum following distance specifically defined for the following vehicle 304 or defined for the vehicles of the platoon 300; see also paragraph [0127] where Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance); and
in response to the determination that one or more collision conditions are satisfied, determining one or more actions based on the some or all of the received second vehicle data, first vehicle data from the first vehicle, and the received sensor data by the computing device of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0063], Lahti discloses that the predicted speed trajectory information 318 may be constrained according to a defined minimum following distance for the following vehicle 304, as described with respect to the predicted speed trajectory information 218 of FIG. 2 and elsewhere herein, for instance, a programmed constraint of the cruise control system 110 may specify that the following distances of the following distance profile cannot be smaller than a minimum following distance specifically defined for the following vehicle 304 or defined for the vehicles of the platoon 300; in paragraph [0127], Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance).
Regarding claim 10, Lahti further discloses wherein the one or more actions comprise one or more of increasing a speed of the first vehicle and decreasing the speed of the second vehicle (In paragraph [0021], Lahti discloses that operation of the vehicles is controlled in view of speed trajectory information communicated between the vehicles and detected distances between the vehicles; in paragraph [0127], Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance; in paragraph [0133], Lahti discloses that at 844, the following vehicle 804 implements the second predicted speed trajectory information while traveling along the upcoming segment of road, and the method 800 may be iteratively performed while traveling along the upcoming segment and beyond).
Regarding claim 12, Lahti further discloses wherein the received second vehicle data comprises one or more of a current velocity of the second vehicle, a weight of the second vehicle, and a weight class of the second vehicle (In paragraph [0066], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 may include a maximum speed for the reference position, which may be a current speed or a predicted maximum speed of the vehicle; in paragraph [0068], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 are determined by the cruise control system 110 based on the terrain of the upcoming segment of road and may be based on characteristics of the vehicle that may include the current vehicle speed and the weight of the vehicle, including the weight of a load that the vehicle is towing; in paragraph [0125], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804).
Regarding claim 13, Lahti further discloses wherein the first vehicle data comprises one or more of a current velocity of the first vehicle, a weight of the first vehicle, and a weight class of the first vehicle (In paragraphs [0050-0051], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road, where for instance, the cruise control system 110 of the vehicle 210 may be configured to generate a following distance profile that does not include a following distance less than a defined minimum following distance to the adjacent vehicle ahead, and the defined minimum following distance of the vehicle 210, in some embodiments, may be specific to the vehicle 210 based on, e.g., weight of the vehicle 210 and a load towed thereby, engine retarder torque, weather conditions, and/or brake system configuration; in paragraph [0066], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 may include a maximum speed for the reference position, which may be a current speed or a predicted maximum speed of the vehicle; in paragraph [0068], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 are determined by the cruise control system 110 based on the terrain of the upcoming segment of road and may be based on characteristics of the vehicle that may include the current vehicle speed and the weight of the vehicle, including the weight of a load that the vehicle is towing).
Regarding claim 14, Lahti further discloses transmitting the first vehicle data to the second vehicle via the connection (In paragraph [0036], Lahti discloses that each cruise control system 110 may generate speed trajectory information based on speed trajectory information received from other vehicles of the plurality vehicles 102; in paragraph [0052], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 of the vehicle 210 transmits the predicted speed trajectory information 218 to the adjacent vehicle behind the vehicle 210—in this case, the vehicle 206, where the cruise control system 110 of each successive following vehicle generates and predicted speed trajectory information to the rearwardly adjacent vehicle in the platoon 200 until no additional rearwardly adjacent vehicles of the platoon 200 exist, and the cruise control system 110 of the last vehicle 202 of the platoon 200 generates predicted speed trajectory information based on predicted speed trajectory information 220 received from the vehicle 206 ahead).
Regarding claim 16, Lahti discloses a system for improving the safety of vehicles comprising:
at least one computing device connected to a first vehicle (In paragraph [0025], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 implementing the predictive adaptive cruise control techniques disclosed herein is a processor-based system, such as an embedded system, that includes one or more processors 112 that are communicatively coupled to control certain operations of the vehicle in which the cruise control system 110 is installed); and
a computer-readable medium storing computer executable instructions (In paragraph [0027], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 also includes memory 114 communicatively coupled with the one or more processors for storing data, such as speed trajectory information described herein, where the memory 114 comprises volatile computer-readable media (e.g., random-access memory) and/or non-volatile computer-readable media (e.g., read-only memory) for reading and writing data, and the memory 114, in some embodiments, stores a set of instructions that, as a result of execution by the one or more processors 112, causes the cruise control system 110 to perform operations described herein) that when executed by the at least one computing device cause the at least one computing device to:
receive sensor data from one or more sensors of the first vehicle (In paragraph [0025], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 implementing the predictive adaptive cruise control techniques disclosed herein is a processor-based system, such as an embedded system, that includes one or more processors 112 that are communicatively coupled to receive measurements from sensors on the vehicle measuring operational characteristics of the vehicle, such as vehicle speed, crankshaft rotational speed, driveshaft rotational speed, transmission speed sensor, and brake pressure; in paragraph [0029], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 further includes or is coupled with one or more sensors 120 that are configured to measure distance to adjacent vehicles or objects around the vehicle, in particular, the one or more sensors 120 are positioned and configured to measure a distance to an adjacent vehicle ahead of the vehicle and behind the vehicle in which the cruise control system 110 is installed);
based on the received sensor data from the one or more sensors, determine that a second vehicle is traveling behind the first vehicle (In paragraph [0029], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system 110 further includes or is coupled with one or more sensors 120 that are configured to measure distance to adjacent vehicles or objects around the vehicle, in particular, the one or more sensors 120 are positioned and configured to measure a distance to an adjacent vehicle ahead of the vehicle and behind the vehicle in which the cruise control system 110 is installed);
establish a connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle (In paragraph [0050], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may, for example, determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road; in paragraph [0126], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804);
receive second vehicle data from the second vehicle via the connection (In paragraph [0036], Lahti discloses that each cruise control system 110 may generate speed trajectory information based on speed trajectory information received from other vehicles of the plurality vehicles 102; in paragraph [0125], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804);
using some or all of the received second vehicle data, first vehicle data from the first vehicle, and the received sensor data, determine that one or more collision conditions are satisfied (In paragraphs [0050-0051], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road, where for instance, the cruise control system 110 of the vehicle 210 may be configured to generate a following distance profile that does not include a following distance less than a defined minimum following distance to the adjacent vehicle ahead, and the defined minimum following distance of the vehicle 210, in some embodiments, may be specific to the vehicle 210 based on, e.g., weight of the vehicle 210 and a load towed thereby, engine retarder torque, weather conditions, and/or brake system configuration; in paragraph [0063], Lahti discloses that the predicted speed trajectory information 318 may be constrained according to a defined minimum following distance for the following vehicle 304, as described with respect to the predicted speed trajectory information 218 of FIG. 2 and elsewhere herein, for instance, a programmed constraint of the cruise control system 110 may specify that the following distances of the following distance profile cannot be smaller than a minimum following distance specifically defined for the following vehicle 304 or defined for the vehicles of the platoon 300; see also paragraph [0127] where Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance); and
in response to the determination that one or more collision conditions are satisfied, determine one or more actions based on the some or all of the received second vehicle data, first vehicle data from the first vehicle, and the received sensor data (In paragraph [0063], Lahti discloses that the predicted speed trajectory information 318 may be constrained according to a defined minimum following distance for the following vehicle 304, as described with respect to the predicted speed trajectory information 218 of FIG. 2 and elsewhere herein, for instance, a programmed constraint of the cruise control system 110 may specify that the following distances of the following distance profile cannot be smaller than a minimum following distance specifically defined for the following vehicle 304 or defined for the vehicles of the platoon 300; in paragraph [0127], Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance).
Regarding claim 17, Lahti further discloses wherein the one or more actions comprise one or more of increasing the speed of the first vehicle and decreasing the speed of the second vehicle (In paragraph [0021], Lahti discloses that operation of the vehicles is controlled in view of speed trajectory information communicated between the vehicles and detected distances between the vehicles; in paragraph [0127], Lahti discloses that determining 822 may include determining a following distance error, if any, corresponding to at least one difference between a defined following distance and a measured following distance, where the defined following distance may be a following distance specified in the predicted speed trajectory information implemented by the following vehicle 804 for the current segment, and as a result of determining 822 that a following error is present based on a measured following distance to the lead vehicle 802, the cruise control system 110 may shift the speed profile of the maximum speeds specified in the first arbitrated speed trajectory information by a distance corresponding to the following error distance; in paragraph [0133], Lahti discloses that at 844, the following vehicle 804 implements the second predicted speed trajectory information while traveling along the upcoming segment of road, and the method 800 may be iteratively performed while traveling along the upcoming segment and beyond).
Regarding claim 19, Lahti further discloses wherein the received second vehicle data comprises one or more of a current velocity of the second vehicle, a weight of the second vehicle, and a weight class of the second vehicle (In paragraph [0066], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 may include a maximum speed for the reference position, which may be a current speed or a predicted maximum speed of the vehicle; in paragraph [0068], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 are determined by the cruise control system 110 based on the terrain of the upcoming segment of road and may be based on characteristics of the vehicle that may include the current vehicle speed and the weight of the vehicle, including the weight of a load that the vehicle is towing; in paragraph [0125], Lahti discloses that the method 800 includes receiving 820, by the following vehicle 804, the first predicted maximum speed trajectory information transmitted by the following vehicle 806 adjacent to and behind the following vehicle 804).
Regarding claim 20, Lahti further discloses wherein the first vehicle data comprises one or more of a current velocity of the first vehicle, a weight of the first vehicle, and a weight class of the first vehicle (In paragraphs [0050-0051], Lahti discloses that the cruise control system may determine a following distance profile specifying predicted following distances of the vehicle 210 to the lead vehicle 214 based on the predicted speed trajectory information 216 received from the lead vehicle 214 and based on the terrain information for the upcoming segment of road, where for instance, the cruise control system 110 of the vehicle 210 may be configured to generate a following distance profile that does not include a following distance less than a defined minimum following distance to the adjacent vehicle ahead, and the defined minimum following distance of the vehicle 210, in some embodiments, may be specific to the vehicle 210 based on, e.g., weight of the vehicle 210 and a load towed thereby, engine retarder torque, weather conditions, and/or brake system configuration; in paragraph [0066], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 may include a maximum speed for the reference position, which may be a current speed or a predicted maximum speed of the vehicle; in paragraph [0068], Lahti discloses that the predicted maximum speeds 402 are determined by the cruise control system 110 based on the terrain of the upcoming segment of road and may be based on characteristics of the vehicle that may include the current vehicle speed and the weight of the vehicle, including the weight of a load that the vehicle is towing).
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.
Claims 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lahti (US 2021/0213948 A1), in view of Bergquist (US 11,004,344 B2).
Regarding claim 11, Lahti does not explicitly disclose wherein establishing the connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle comprises establishing the connection using one or more rear lights of the first vehicle and one or more front lights of the second vehicle.
However, Bergquist teaches wherein establishing the connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle comprises establishing the connection using one or more rear lights of the first vehicle (In column 6 lines 13-59, Bergquist teaches that the ego vehicle 10 determines whether or not the preceding vehicle 14 performed the predetermined action that the communicating vehicle 12 was requested to perform, for example to determine whether the preceding vehicle 14 performed the predetermined action, the ego vehicle 10 compares the received data with data from the on-board sensor 16 for the period defined by aforementioned start and end times, and if the data match, the ego vehicle 10 determines that the preceding vehicle 14 did perform the predetermined action, whereby the ego vehicle 10 concludes that the communicating vehicle 12 and the following vehicle 14 are the same, and in one embodiment the on-board sensor 16 is a camera and the action to be performed by the communicating vehicle 12 is the communicating vehicle 12 flashing its brake lights).
Bergquist is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention in that they both pertain to utilizing lights on the vehicle to establish the validity of a connection between two vehicles. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Bergquist with the method as disclosed by Lahti in that preexisting equipment on one of the communicating vehicles (rear lights) may be utilized, therefore increasing ease of achieving the technical effect of the method, for example. Furthermore, the utilization of lights observed via sensors may be advantageous in that doing so eliminates the requirement of transmitting information wholesale (via radio frequency or V2V for example) or access to a large database of vehicle IDs or equivalent, only requiring the pairing vehicles to perform and observe an expected series of actions.
Regarding claim 18, Lahti does not explicitly disclose wherein establishing the connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle comprises establishing the connection using one or more rear lights of the first vehicle and one or more front lights of the second vehicle.
However, Bergquist teaches wherein establishing the connection between the first vehicle and the second vehicle comprises establishing the connection using one or more rear lights of the first vehicle (In column 6 lines 13-59, Bergquist teaches that the ego vehicle 10 determines whether or not the preceding vehicle 14 performed the predetermined action that the communicating vehicle 12 was requested to perform, for example to determine whether the preceding vehicle 14 performed the predetermined action, the ego vehicle 10 compares the received data with data from the on-board sensor 16 for the period defined by aforementioned start and end times, and if the data match, the ego vehicle 10 determines that the preceding vehicle 14 did perform the predetermined action, whereby the ego vehicle 10 concludes that the communicating vehicle 12 and the following vehicle 14 are the same, and in one embodiment the on-board sensor 16 is a camera and the action to be performed by the communicating vehicle 12 is the communicating vehicle 12 flashing its brake lights).
Bergquist is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention in that they both pertain to utilizing lights on the vehicle to establish the validity of a connection between two vehicles. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Bergquist with the system as disclosed by Lahti in that preexisting equipment on one of the communicating vehicles (rear lights) may be utilized, therefore increasing ease of achieving the technical effect of the method, for example. Furthermore, the utilization of lights observed via sensors may be advantageous in that doing so eliminates the requirement of transmitting information wholesale (via radio frequency or V2V for example) or access to a large database of vehicle IDs or equivalent, only requiring the pairing vehicles to perform and observe an expected series of actions.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lahti (US 2021/0213948 A1), in view of Bloomfield (US 2002/0171542 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Lahti does not explicitly disclose wherein if no connection can be established between the first vehicle and the second vehicle:
based on the received data from the one or more sensors, determining that a distance between the first vehicle and the second vehicle is below a first threshold; and
in response to the determination that the distance between the first vehicle and the second vehicle is below the first threshold, activating one or more lights on the rear of the first vehicle to signal to the second vehicle that the second vehicle is too close to the first vehicle.
However, Bloomfield teaches wherein if no connection can be established between the first vehicle and the second vehicle (In paragraph [0022], Bloomfield teaches that a rear proximity sensor may be directed rearwardly of the vehicle 12 while a forwardly directed sensor may be positioned in a forward portion of vehicle 12 and sidewardly directed sensors may be operable to detect objects to either side of vehicle 12, where control 18 may further vary a distance threshold for objects positioned forwardly or rearwardly of vehicle 12 in response to the speed being traveled by vehicle 12 or an approach rate of the object; the Examiner understands the teachings of Bloomfield will be performed “if no connection can be established between the first vehicle and the second vehicle” where the detection of objects and control based thereon does not require the establishment of communications between the vehicle and the surrounding detected objects):
based on the received data from the one or more sensors, determining that a distance between the first vehicle and the second vehicle is below a first threshold (In paragraph [0022], Bloomfield teaches that control 18 may further vary a distance threshold for objects positioned forwardly or rearwardly of vehicle 12 in response to the speed being traveled by vehicle 12 or an approach rate of the object, where this facilitates modulation of indicator 14 in situations when vehicle 12 is an unsafe distance from a leading or trailing vehicle); and
in response to the determination that the distance between the first vehicle and the second vehicle is below the first threshold, activating one or more lights on the rear of the first vehicle to signal to the second vehicle that the second vehicle is too close to the first vehicle (In paragraph [0017], Bloomfield teaches that safety light system 10 is interconnected with an indicator 14 and actuates, adjusts or modulates an output of indicator 14 in response to one or more electronic inputs 16 (FIG. 2), where preferably, indicator 14 is a center high mounted stop lamp (CHMSL) 14a of vehicle 12, but may be another exteriorly directed light or lights on vehicle 12, such as taillights 14b, headlamps, turn signal indicators or the like or a separately installed signaling device; in paragraph [0022], Bloomfield teaches that control 18 may further vary a distance threshold for objects positioned forwardly or rearwardly of vehicle 12 in response to the speed being traveled by vehicle 12 or an approach rate of the object, where this facilitates modulation of indicator 14 in situations when vehicle 12 is an unsafe distance from a leading or trailing vehicle, where control 18 may further vary the output of indicator 14 in response to varying threshold levels in accordance to the distance and/or approach rate of the object to vehicle 12).
Bloomfield is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention in that they both pertain to signaling to nearby vehicles an unsafe trailing distance by activation of rear lights without establishing two-way communications. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Bloomfield with the method as disclosed by Lahti, where doing so may increase safety by indicating potentially dangerous situations to surrounding traffic in a wider variety of circumstances, for example.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Patnaik (US 2021/0382480 A1) teaches methods for transitioning between autonomous driving modes in large vehicles.
Pilkington (US 2018/0188745 A1) teaches varying the distance between vehicles in a platoon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harrison Heflin whose telephone number is (571)272-5629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 1:00PM - 10:00PM 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 571-272-7298. 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.
/HARRISON HEFLIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665