CTFR 18/843,291 CTFR 83888 DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment This action is in response to the remark entered on April 2 nd , 2026. Claims 1 – 5, 7 – 10, 13 and 15 – 19 are pending in current application. Claims 6, 11 – 12 and 14 are cancelled. Claims 1, 10, 13 are amended. Claim 19 is newly added. Foreign Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the recited essence claim limitation regarding, “auxiliary perception information”, “auxiliary perception component”, “a control instruction” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 06-22 Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are “an acquisition module”, “a determination module”, “an auxiliary controller”, “a main controller”, “auxiliary perception component” and “an execution device” in claims 1, 13 and 15. In this instant case, the acquisition module, determination module, auxiliary/main controller, auxiliary perception component and execution device recited above directs to a means implementing functional limitation using the term “configured to” where the means recited above without precedent structural modifier using generic placeholder as module, controller and device without structural revelation thus are deemed to be functional limitation where the recited claim limitation mainly provides functional operation of the means. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1 and 10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. It is noted that dependent claims based upon the rejected claims are also rejected based upon dependency. Regarding claim 1, applicant recited claim limitation regarding, “auxiliar perception information is information fed back” does not distinctly set forth particularly for what exactly the information referring to where skilled in the art could not locate and ascertain the metes and bounds. In this instant case, upon further review, skilled in the art could merely locate in applicant’s written description, Para 0073, regarding to auxiliary perception information relate to information from, “ may include…e.g. rain sensor…or the like ”…does not set forth and encircle the metes and bond regarding the information as ought to be ascertain without particularly and distinctly set forth recited claim limitation. Appropriate further clarification is required. Regarding claim 10, applicant recited claim limitation regarding, “a control instruction…a control instruction…according to the control instruction” does not distinctly set forth particularly for which exactly the control instruction is referring to as ought to be set forth particularly and distinctly regards to sufficient antecedent basis with respect to applicant’s invention. Appropriate further clarification is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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: 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 – 8, 11 – 13and 15 - 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Cai et al (CN 113721614 in view of English Translation) . Regarding claim 1, Cai et al shows an autonomous driving method (See at least Para 0001 and 0002 for L4 autonomous driving controller) applied to an auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0006 for secondary MCU unit) comprising: for acquiring state monitoring information (See at least Para 0018 for secondary MCU monitor master MCU working status with heart beat signal in 10ms cycle via CAN, Controller Area Network; also on Para 0014 for secondary MCU performs safety monitoring in real time safety with master MCU heart beat signal monitoring), the state monitoring information is information obtained by monitoring an operation state of a main controller (See at least Para 0018 for secondary MCU monitor master MCU working status with heart beat signal in 10ms cycle via CAN; also on Para 0006 for main MCU connected to secondary MCU unit using UART, Universal Asynchronized Receiver/Transmitter with double backup); controlling an operation state of an autonomous vehicle in response to determining that the main controller is operating abnormally according to the state monitoring information (See at Para 0018 – 0020 for secondary MCU determines the fail/abnormal of MCU and take over the autonomous vehicle control on Para 0020; See at least Para 0014 for secondary MCU performs safety real time monitoring for master MCU); acquiring auxiliary perception information after controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle (See at least figure 1 for the Secondary MCU is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver with standby mode receiving sensory input after taking control from Master MCU), the auxiliary perception information is information fed back an auxiliary perception component (See at least Table 2 for CAN bus communication interface port designated Port B1/B2 is for camera and Port B3 – C4 is for radar communication supply sensory parameter toward Secondary MCU), updating state information of the autonomous vehicle according the auxiliary perception information (See at least figure 1 for the Secondary MCU is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver receiving updated sensory perception information as state information for the autonomous vehicle). Regarding claim 2, Cai et al shows the state monitoring information comprises: monitoring information in a preset period (See at least Para 0017 for 10ms cycle monitoring); determining that the main controller is operating abnormally in response to the received monitoring information being abnormal information (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times). Regarding claim 3, Cai et al the determining that the main controller is operating abnormally in response to no monitoring information being received in the preset period (See at least Para 0018 for monitoring as whether the master MCU successfully establish communication link with secondary MCU where fail of establishing communication link as no monitoring information given by master MCU in 10ms period) comprises: accumulating a total number of abnormal occurrences receiving no monitoring information in the preset period to obtain the accumulated number of the abnormal occurrences (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times); determining that the main controller is operating abnormally in response to the accumulated number of the abnormal occurrences exceeding a preset number threshold (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times determined to be abnormal). Regarding claim 4, Cai et al shows in response to determining that the accumulated number of the abnormal occurrences exceeds the preset number threshold (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times determined to be abnormal), before determining that the main controller is operating abnormally (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times determined to be abnormal and reset to clear abnormal count), initializing the number of abnormal occurrences in response to receiving any monitoring information in the preset period and the monitoring information being normal information (See at least Para 0019 for fail/abnormal count accumulated to 3 times determined to be abnormal and reset to clear abnormal count in 10ms cycle). Regarding claim 5, Cai et al shows receiving perception information (See at least Para 0015 for fusion MCU output toward main MCU for vehicle perception information), the perception information is information fed back by a first data perception component (See at least Para 0015 for IMU sensor and GNSS positioning chip); determining the state monitoring information according to the perception information (See at least Para 0015 for IMU sensor and GNSS positioning chip); the state monitoring information comprises speed information of driving of the autonomous vehicle (See at least Para 0015 for speed information), position information of the autonomous vehicle (See at least Para 0015 for positional information). Regarding claim 6, Cai et al shows acquiring auxiliary perception information after controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle (See at least Para 0015 for perception information data transmitted to autonomous driving controller including master and secondary MCU on Para 0012; Para 0043 for secondary MCU S08D chip control the operation state by sending stop car instruction to master MCU on Step 2 and further continue monitor the auxiliary perception information further clarify the malfunction on Step 3 upon receiving the information), the auxiliary perception information is information fed back by an auxiliary perception component (See at least Para 0015 for perception information data transmitted to autonomous driving controller including master and secondary MCU on Para 0012; Para 0043 for secondary MCU S08D chip control the operation state by sending stop car instruction to master MCU on Step 2 and further continue monitor the auxiliary perception information further clarify the malfunction on Step 3 upon receiving the information); updating the state monitoring information of the autonomous vehicle according to the auxiliary perception information (See at least Para 0015 for perception information data transmitted to autonomous driving controller including master and secondary MCU on Para 0012; Para 0043 for secondary MCU S08D chip control the operation state by sending stop car instruction to master MCU on Step 2 and further continue monitor the auxiliary perception information further clarify/update the malfunction on Step 3 upon receiving the information). Regarding claim 7, Cai et al show the perception information comprises at least one of: spatial information where the autonomous vehicle is located (See at least Para 0015 for fusion MCU output toward main MCU for vehicle perception information; also at least Para 0015 for IMU sensor and GNSS positioning chip). Regarding claim 8, Cai et al shows cutting off a control of the main controller over the autonomous vehicle according to a method of preemption (See at least Para 0041 for take over the control by secondary MCU in heart beat monitoring); controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to risk avoidance information (See at least Para 0041 for master MCU abnormal count accumulation information), the risk avoidance information is information determined based on abnormal information of operation of the main controller (See at least Para 0041 for master MCU abnormal count accumulation information). Regarding claim 11, Cai et al shows an autonomous driving method applied to a main controller (See at least Para 0012 for autonomous driving control system with MCU control chip module including master MCU) comprising: generating state monitoring information (See at least Para 0017 for heart beat signal from master MCU chip); sending the state monitoring information to an auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0017 for master MCU proving heart beat signal toward secondary MCU via CAN, Controller Area Network), so that the auxiliary controller controls an operation state of an autonomous vehicle in response to determining that the main controller is operating abnormally according to the state monit oring information (See at least Para 0040 and 0041 for master MCU determined abnormal with communication fail on Para 0039 and took over the autonomous vehicle driving when abnormal count to 3 times on Para 0041; Intended Use; see at least MPEP 2111.02 for intended use where applicant recited claim limitation with respect to auxiliary controller operation exerted upon auxiliary controller does not further limiting…during examination, statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention must be evaluated to determine whether or not the recited purpose or intended use results in a structural difference (or, in the case of process claims, manipulative difference) between the claimed invention and the prior art. In this instant case, applicant recited claim preamble regarding main controller applied upon for operation state determination along with auxiliary controller operation for autonomous vehicle exertion determined are not within the main controller and also are not applied to main controller as claimed nor does the claim limitation, auxiliary controller autonomous operation, confined by main controller and thus are not further limiting). Regarding claim 12, Cai et al shows stopping controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle in response to determining that the main controller has a fault (See at least Para 0040 and 0041 for master MCU determined abnormal with communication fail on Para 0039 and took over the autonomous vehicle driving when abnormal count to 3 times on Para 0041; also Para 044 for emergency stop after determined abnomral), after sending the state monitoring information to the auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0017 for master MCU proving heart beat signal toward secondary MCU via CAN, Controller Area Network), generating alarm information (See at least Para 0040 for Master MCU abnormal counts accumulates to 3 times generating alarm determination signal), the alarm information is configured to alert an operation end for operating the autonomous vehicle that the autonomous vehicle is abnormal (See at least Para 0043 and 0044 for further alerting for the AI chip module detection as the autonomous drive operation end in real time monitoring). Regarding claim 13, Cai et al an auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0032 for MCU module with MCU S08D chip on Para 0038) comprising: an acquisition module configured to acquire state monitoring information (See at least Para 0006 for secondary MCU unit/acquisition module receiving master MCU unit signal using UART, Universal Asynchronized Receiver/Transmitter; see also at least Figure 1, where the Secondary MCU, acquisition module, is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver receiving sensory input), the state monitoring information is information obtained by monitoring an operation state of a main controller (See at least Para 0018 for secondary MCU monitor master MCU working status with heart beat signal in 10ms cycle via CAN; also on Para 0006 for main MCU connected to secondary MCU unit using UART, Universal Asynchronized Receiver/Transmitter with double backup); a determination module configured to control an operation state of an autonomous vehicle in response to determining that the main controller is operating abnormally according to the state monitoring information (See at least Para 0040 for secondary MCU, S08D chip, determine the master MCU has been abnormal), the acquisition module further acquiring auxiliary perception information after controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle (See at least figure 1 for the Secondary MCU is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver with standby mode receiving sensory input after taking control from Master MCU), the auxiliary perception information is information fed back an auxiliary perception component (See at least Table 2 for CAN bus communication interface port designated Port B1/B2 is for camera and Port B3 – C4 is for radar communication supply sensory parameter toward Secondary MCU), updating state information of the autonomous vehicle according the auxiliary perception information (See at least figure 1 for the Secondary MCU is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver receiving updated sensory perception information as state information for the autonomous vehicle). Regarding claims 15 and 18, Cai et al shows an autonomous driving system (See at least Para 0001 and 0002 for L4 autonomous driving controller) comprising: a main controller (See at least Para 0012 for autonomous driving control system with MCU control chip module including master MCU), an auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0017 for master MCU proving heart beat signal toward secondary MCU via CAN, Controller Area Network), an execution device (See at least Para 0012 for autonomous drive controller) and a data perception component which are connected communicatively (See at least Para 0034 and 0035 for GNSS Positioning Chip connecting to MCU and Xavier Chip); the auxiliary controller is configured to perform the autonomous driving method (See at least Para 0041 for secondary MCU took over control of the autonomous vehicle for vehicle slow down and stop), the main controller is configured to perform the autonomous driving method (See at least Para 0012 for autonomous drive controller with MCU control chip module) generate state monitoring information (See at least Para 0017 for master MCU proving heart beat signal toward secondary MCU via CAN, Controller Area Network), send the state monitoring information to the auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0017 for master MCU proving heart beat signal toward secondary MCU via CAN, Controller Area Network); the execution device is configured to acquire control information sent by the main controller or the auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0012 and 0033 for autonomous drive controller with GNSS positioning chip module and Xavier Chip), maintain or change an operation state of an autonomous vehicle according to the control information (See at least Para 00044 for changing vehicle operation based on abnormal information; Para 0012 – 0015 for maintain autonomous vehicle navigation using autonomous drive controller); the data perception component is configured to feed perception information back to the main controller or the auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0033 for GNSS Positioning chip connecting Xavier chip A and master MCU chip ), so that the main controller or the auxiliary controller determines state monitoring information of the autonomous vehicle according to the perception information (Intended Use; See at least Para 0033 for GNSS Positioning chip connecting Xavier chip A and master MCU chip for determine positional information using GNSS as state information ), the state monitoring information comprises position information of the autonomous vehicle (See at least Para 0033 for GNSS Positioning chip connecting Xavier chip A and master MCU chip ). Regarding claim 16, Cai et al shows an electronic device comprising: at least one processor (See at least Para 0032 for MCU chip implemented via computer chip processor; also at least Para 0036 for table 1 for autonomous drive controller including MPC5748/Master MCU equipped with SRAM and Flash Memory with Xavier Chip); a memory having at least one computer program stored th; ereon (See at least Para 0036 for table 1 for autonomous drive controller including MPC5748/Master MCU equipped with SRAM and Flash Memory), computer program causes the processor to implement the autonomous driving method executed by processor (See at least Para 0036 for table 1 for autonomous drive controller including MPC5748/Master MCU equipped with SRAM and Flash Memory). Regarding claim 17, Cai et al shows a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon (See at least Para 0036 for table 1 for autonomous drive controller including MPC5748/Master MCU equipped with SRAM and Flash Memory with Xavier Chip), the computer program causes processor to implement the autonomous driving method executed by processor (See at least Para 0036 for table 1 for autonomous drive controller including MPC5748/Master MCU equipped with SRAM and Flash Memory with Xavier chip) . 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shabtai et al (US Pat Pub No.2020/0331500) . 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: 07-12-aia AIA (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. Regarding claim 19, Shabtai et al shows an autonomous driving method applied to an auxiliary controller (See at least Para 0081 for autonomous sytem 100 as a system for autonomously controlling a vehicle that includes and applied to failure detection subsystem 120 ) comprising: acquiring state monitoring information (See at least Para 0082 for failure detection sub-system 120 operationally isolated and obtain/process sensory data), the state monitoring information is information obtained by monitoring an operation state of a main controller (See at least Para 0082 for control subsystem 110 to be monitored by failure detection sub-system 120); controlling an operation state of an autonomous vehicle in response to determining that the main controller is operating abnormally according to the state monitoring information (See at least Para 0120 for vehicle subsystem malfunction on step 237 further forward to step 231 for emergency command output on figure 2b as for Para 0122 controls the vehicle), cutting off a control of the main controller over the autonomous vehicle according to a method of preemption (See at least Para 0120 for vehicle subsystem malfunction on step 237 further forward to step 231 for emergency command output on figure 2b as for Para 0122 controls the vehicle); controlling the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to risk avoidance information (See at least Para 0010 for failure detection sub-system avoid an imminent mishap; Para 0089,0092 for information for object and road condition should be avoided; Para 0123 for vehicle malfunction), the risk avoidance information is information determined based on perception information fed back from a data perception component (See at least Para 0100 for vehicle control override system 125 within failure detection subsystem 120 responsive for to avoid collision based upon the object captured by scanner and camera as data perception component on Para 0087), the auxiliary controller is configured to send a control instruction to an auxiliary actuator (See at least Para 0100 for vehicle control override system 125 within failure detection subsystem 120 responsive for to avoid collision controlling gear subsystem), so that the auxiliary actuator controls the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the control instruction (intended use achieved by the claim limitation discussed above; Please also see MPEP 2111. II), the main controller is configured to send a control instruction to a master actuator (See at least Para 0075 and 0081 for autonomous control subsystem 110 sending instruction to driving subsystem 130 including generating control instruction for controlling the vehicle, as the actuator, actuated along the progression route on Para 0080) so that the master actuator controls the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the control instruction (See at Para 0080 for the vehicle actuated itself autonomously control the operation state of the autonomous vehicle accordingly along the progression route; intended use achieved by sending the control instruction discussed in precedent above. Please also see MPEP 2111. II.), cutting off the control of the main actuator over the autonomous vehicle according to the method of preemption (See at least Para 0082 for failure detection sub system 120 provides emergency response as instruction to breaking toward breaking sub-system and disengagement toward throttle sub-system; also on Para 0116 – 0118 for safety rule adapted); controlling the auxiliary actuator to control the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the risk avoiding information (See at least Para 0010 for failure detection sub-system avoid an imminent mishap; Para 0089,0092 for information for object and road condition should be avoided; Para 0123 for vehicle malfunction). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9, 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al (CN 113721614 in view of English Translation) in view of Shabtai et al (US Pat Pub No.2020/0331500) . Regarding claim 9, Cai et al shows generating a control instruction according to the risk avoiding information (See at least Para 0041 for secondary MCU sends the vehicle control instruction); sending the control instruction to the vehicle (See at least Para 0041 for instruction to control vehicle to slow down and stop), so that the control instruction controls the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the control instruction (See at least Para 0041 for instruction to control vehicle to slow down and stop; intended use achieved by sending the control instruction discussed in precedent above. Please also see MPEP 2111. II.); however, the control instruction of Cai et al does not further specify provided to an actuator; Shabtai et al shows the vehicle with an actuator (See at least figure 2 a for vehicle system 100 including autonomous control sub-system 110 and failure detection sub-system 120 each connected to the sensor and braking/throttle sub- system as actuator) the actuator is communicatively connected with the main controller and the auxiliary controller respectively (See at least figure 2 a for vehicle system 100 including autonomous control sub-system 110 and failure detection sub-system 120 each connected to the sensor and braking/throttle sub- system as actuator). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide actuator control of Shabita, for the autonomous vehicle control during abnormal condition exerted and controlled by secondary MCU controller, in order to provide safety operation, Para 0014 of Chi, as desired and implemented for vehicle speed slow down, on Para 0041 of Chi. Regarding claim 10, Shabtai et al further shows the main controller is configured to send a control instruction to master actuator (See at least Para 0075 and 0081 for autonomous control subsystem 110 sending instruction to driving subsystem 130 including generating control instruction for controlling the vehicle, as the actuator, actuated along the progression route on Para 0080), so that the master actuator controls the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the control instruction ( See at Para 0080 for the vehicle actuated itself autonomously control the operation state of the autonomous vehicle accordingly along the progression route; intended use achieved by sending the control instruction discussed in precedent above. Please also see MPEP 2111. II.); auxiliary controller configured to send control instruction to an auxiliary actuator (See at least Para 0082 for failure detection sub system 120 provides emergency response as instruction to breaking toward breaking sub-system and disengagement toward throttle sub-system ), so that the auxiliary actuator controls the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the control instruction ( See at least Para 0082 for failure detection sub system 120 provides emergency response as instruction to breaking toward breaking sub-system and disengagement toward throttle sub- system; intended use achieved by sending the control instruction discussed in precedent above. Please also see MPEP 2111. II.), cutting off the control of the main actuator over the autonomous vehicle according to the method of preemption (See at least Para 0082 for failure detection sub system 120 provides emergency response as instruction to breaking toward breaking sub-system and disengagement toward throttle sub-system; also on Para 0116 – 0118 for safety rule adapted); controlling the auxiliary actuator to control the operation state of the autonomous vehicle according to the risk avoiding information (See at least Para 0010 for failure detection sub-system avoid an imminent mishap; Para 0089,0092 for information for object and road condition should be avoided; Para 0123 for vehicle malfunction). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide actuator control of Shabita, for the autonomous vehicle control during abnormal condition exerted and controlled by secondary MCU controller, in order to provide safety operation, Para 0014 of Chi, as desired and implemented for vehicle speed slow down, on Para 0041 of Chi . 12-261 AIA Response to Argument In response to applicant’s remark that Cai does not shows applicant newly recited claim limitation as previous claim 6 since Para 0012 – 0015 of Cai et al does not shows parameters are transmitted to Secondary MCU after the Secondary MCU control the operation state of the autonomous vehicle; however, applicant’s remark does not particularly accurate and comprehensive. In this instant case, applicant’s attention is directed to recited Para 0041 - 0043, discussed that Secondary MCU sending instruction toward Master MCU as taking control of the vehicle after Secondary MCU determined that Master MCU occurred accumulated failure three time on Para 0040 and taking control on Para 0041 via CAN, Controller Area Network, bus control for vehicular deceleration and stop; Further, applicant’s attention is further direct to Table 2 for CAN bus communication interface port designated from A1 to C4, where port A3/A4 is for whole vehicular as for vehicular control mainly for communication with ECU. Port B1/B2 is for camera and Port B3 – C4 is for radar communication supply sensory parameter toward Secondary MCU. Applicant’s attention is further directed to Figure 1, where the Secondary MCU is connected to CAN via NXP TJA1042T transceiver/receiver receiving sensory input. Thus, Cai et al indeed shows sensory parameter transmitted to the Secondary MCU via TJA1042T transceiver/receiver that is set forth by CAN including camera and radar input after taking control from Master MCU. Further, applicant’s remark states that the parameters are transmitted to autonomous driving controller by navigation module after restarting; however, even though some parameters are transmitted to autonomous driving controller by navigation module, there are also other parameters transmitted to autonomous driving controller including Secondary MCU. Please also see Para 0004 and 0008 of Cai et al states that autonomous driving controller supports high definition camera input port as not from navigation module. In this instant case, the navigation module of Cai is mainly for satellite gps localization planning purpose for navigation as differ from actuator control performed by Master/Secondary MCU where applicant recited claim core essence focus on the autonomous vehicle operation under auxiliary controller. Applicant’s attention is further directed to Figure 1, where Figure 1 shows Xavier chip, Master MCU and Secondary MCU each are equipped with TJA1042T transceiver/receiver receiving CAN communication interface input with sensory input exhibited on Table 2 BUS pin input. Further, applicant’s remark states that Shabtai does not shows the newly recited claim limitation and Cai et al does not shows actuator; however, it is noted that applicant recited claim limitation addressed under Cai et al in view of Shabtai rather than Cai or Shabtai alone where it is Cai et al in view of Shabtai shows the recited claim limitation along with actuator. 07-37-13 AIA It is also further noted to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller , 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Further, upon review, skilled in the art could not locate the power of attorney require for undersigned. Applicant is advised to further supply commensurate power of attorney accordingly in further communication. Please also see N572 communication suppled on March 3 rd , 2025. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Secondary MCU Schematic, S08D chip on Cai et al on Para 0006, manufactured by NXP Semiconductors. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ian JEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3274. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM - 7PM. 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, Abby Lin can be reached at 5712703976. 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. /Ian Jen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 2 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 3 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 4 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 5 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 6 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 7 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 8 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 9 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 10 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 11 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 12 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 13 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 14 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 15 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 16 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 17 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 18 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 19 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 20 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 21 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 22 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 23 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 24 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 25 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 26 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 27 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 28 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 29 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 18/843,291 Page 30 Art Unit: 3657
Prosecution Insights