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 .
Status of Claims
This is in response to Applicant’s case, no. 18/863,472, with an effective filing date of 7/3/2025. Claims 1-4 and 7-11 are currently pending. Claims 5 and 6 have been canceled prior to examination.
Priority
This is the first office action on the merits of the instant application which was filed 7/3/2025, claiming priority to 371 of PCT/JP2022/020241, filed 5/13/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/6/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show: with respect to Fig. 2 details regarding the identifications (i.e.,Fig.2 items 12, LO, VI, and 40-42), as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 an informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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: 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; 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 the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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:
vehicle support device… support a wheel of the vehicle (claim 10 line(s) 4) is described by the Applicant in [0012] sentence 2 as either a chassis dynamo or a free roller;
image generation device… generate a virtual image of an environment seen in a forward direction from the vehicle (claim 10 line(s) 5) is described in [0015] sentence 1 as an electronic control unit that generates a simulation image of an environment in the forward direction of the vehicle and in [0015] sentence 3 as a processor and an electronic circuit including peripheral components, such as a storage device;
image display device displaying the virtual image (claim 10 line(s) 14) is described in [0020] sentences 1-3 as displaying a virtual image generated by the image generation device and may include, for example, a screen arranged in front of the vehicle to be inspected and a projection device configured to project the virtual image on the screen and/or it may be a display monitor device that is arranged in front of the vehicle to be inspected and displays a virtual image; and
diagnostic device… determine whether or not the vehicle stops before an obstacle (claim 10 line(s) 22) is described in [0027] sentences 2-4 as an electronic control unit that diagnoses an inspection result of the driving assistance device and includes a processor (i.e., a CPU or an MPU) and an electronic circuit including peripheral components (i.e., a storage device).
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.
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(s) 1-4 and 7-11 is/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.
Regarding claim 1 (i.e., line 6) and claim 10 (i.e., line 7), the claims recite the limitation a virtual image of an environment seen in a forward direction from the vehicle and it is unclear how this virtual image is different than the a forward looking image that is recited in lines 2-3 of claim 1 and 10, respectively, or if they are the same image.
Further regarding claim 1 (lines 10-11) and claim 10 (line 16), the claims recite the limitation camera…generate an image and camera…generate the forward looking image, respectively, and it is unclear how this image is different that the virtual image in line 6 of claim 1 and claim 10 line 7. Furthermore, if so, it is unclear how a camera, which generates photographs, can generate a virtual image, which is described by the Applicant in [0015] sentence 1 as a “simulation image”.
Further regarding claim 1 (line 19), the claim recites the limitation generates an image and it is unclear how this image is different that the virtual image in line 6 of claim 1 or the forward looking image that is recited in lines 2-3 of claim 1.
The term “close” in claims 1 and 10 (i.e., claim 1 line 20) is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “close” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitations regarding the distance an obstacle can come toward the vehicle, is rendered indefinite due to the use of the relative term because one cannot reasonably ascertain at what distance the object in the virtual image would have to be in order to determine whether the vehicle stops or not. Applicant can overcome this rejection by amending the respective claims and eliminating any relative terminology. MPEP §2173.05(b)
Claims 2-4, 7-9, and 11 are also rejected as they inherit the rejections of the claim from which they depend.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11 is/are rejected under 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aono et al. (US Pat.. No. 11,967,187 B2), hereinafter referred to as Aono.
Regarding claim 1, Aono discloses:
A vehicle inspection method for a vehicle including a controller configured to control vehicle speed in an automated manner (column (col) 2 line(s) (ln) 9-12 a vehicle control device configured to operate an actuator regarding steering, driving, or braking on the basis of both the detected external environment information and col 3 ln 27-30 the vehicle 200 to be inspected is an automated driving vehicle (including fully automated driving vehicle) capable of automatic control of steering, acceleration/deceleration driving, and braking), based on a forward looking image (see col 2 ln 8-9 a camera configured to detect external environment information by an image, above, col 4 ln 31-32 optical axis of the camera is oriented to the front of the vehicle, and Fig. 1 below which shows the image being forward facing), the vehicle inspection method comprising:
supporting a wheel of the vehicle by a vehicle support device (col 2 ln 3-4 vehicle inspection system configured to inspect, on a bench test machine (e.g., vehicle supporting device), an inspection vehicle and Fig. 1 below which illustrates the vehicle supporting device);
acquiring a vehicle speed signal of the vehicle supported by the vehicle support device (see Fig. 1 vehicle speed sensor);
generating a virtual image of an environment seen in a forward direction from the vehicle in such a way that the virtual image synchronizes with the vehicle speed signal and an obstacle moving in front of the vehicle appears in the virtual image in accordance with a scenario that is determined by a predefined test method (col 6 ln1-3 camera simulator has a function of reproducing video information detected by the camera at the virtual travel position of the vehicle and col 6 ln 26-29 target simulator may cause the target device to function as the preceding vehicle, an obstacle (falling object, person), or the like); and
acquiring characteristics of a camera, the camera being mounted on the vehicle and configured to generate the forward looking image (see Fig. 1 below and col 6 ln1-3 camera simulator has a function of reproducing video information detected by the camera at the virtual travel position of the vehicle), the characteristics being at least any of height from a road surface, an image capturing angle with respect to a travel direction (col 4 ln 25-28 camera captures an image in front of the vehicle at a predetermined view angle (angle of view, range of vision) in the horizontal direction and the vertical direction, which is construed as an image capturing angle with respect to the travel direction and a height from the road surface), and a capturable range from a database storing the characteristics of the camera respect to each vehicle type (col 9 ln 20-24 In order to deal with the change of the vehicle type of the inspection vehicle or the like, at least one of the receiving device and the receiving device is movable in the front-rear direction F, Rr in accordance with the wheel base of the inspection vehicle), adjusting at least any of height, an angle, and a position in the longitudinal direction of an image display device (see col 4 ln 25-28 and col 9 ln 20-24 as discussed above), and displaying the virtual image in such a way that the camera captures the virtual image (col 2 ln 8-9 as discussed above regarding a camera detecting and external environment information via an image),
wherein, in inspection of an automatic braking function, the vehicle inspection method generates an image in which when the vehicle speed is higher than 0, an obstacle in front of the vehicle comes close to the vehicle as the virtual image and determines whether or not the vehicle stops before an obstacle (col 6 ln 26-29 target simulator may cause the target device to function as the preceding vehicle, an obstacle (falling object, person), or the like, col 4 ln 63 to col 5 ln 3 the vehicle control ECU calculates the acceleration/deceleration, the steering angle, and the braking amount that are optimal in each situation (scene) on the basis of the external environment information detected by the external environment sensors, and outputs the operation instruction to the driving device, the steering device, and the braking device each corresponding to a control target device, and col 15 ln 30-40 if the target device is approaching the vehicle rapidly, which is construed as being a vehicle speed greater than 0, and the vehicle control device determines that the vehicle is in a state where the vehicle may collide with the preceding vehicle on the monitor that is simulated by
the target device, and then the vehicle control device compulsorily operates the braking device to thereby operate an automated brake function so as to stop the vehicle, which is interpreted as the vehicle was necessarily moving and needed to be stopped and therefore the vehicle speed is greater than 0).
PNG
media_image1.png
517
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle support device is a chassis dynamo or a free roller (col 8 ln64-65 two rollers support the front wheels from below and are rotatable around an axial line,).
Regarding claim 3, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle inspection method acquires the vehicle speed signal from the vehicle support device or the vehicle (see claim 1 Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 4, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle inspection method inspects at least one of an automatic braking function (see claim 1 regarding an automatic braking function), a constant speed traveling function (col 10 ln 25-26 vehicle is inspected on the bench test machine in a constant speed state, which is construed as a constant speed function), an inter-vehicle distance control function, a lane departure prevention function (col 14 ln 1-14 if the driver operator operates the steering to the left, the camera simulator generates the video information where the left lane mark gets closer to the center of the screen, the control device determines the vehicle is not in the center of the two line demarcations and adjusts the steering so that the vehicle become center with the two lanes, which is construed as a lane departure prevention function), an automatic high beam function, and an adaptive light function achieved by the controller included in the vehicle.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, the Applicant has elected to cancel the claims prior to prosecution and therefore said claims are not under consideration.
Regarding claim 7, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1 comprising:
acquiring a steering angle command signal of a steering angle of the vehicle from the controller (see claim 4 col 14 ln 1-14); and
calculating a yaw angle of the vehicle, based on the steering angle command signal and the vehicle speed signal and generating the virtual image matching the calculated yaw angle (see claim 4 col 14 ln 1-14 and see claim 1 col 4 ln 25-28 where the steering angle is construed as a yaw angle).
Regarding claim 8, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle inspection method displays the virtual image on a display monitor device arranged in front of the vehicle or projects the virtual image on a screen arranged in front of the vehicle (see claim 1 Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1 comprising:
attaching a display device including a display element and an optical system configured to form an optical virtual image of an image displayed by the display element (col 2 ln 12-15 a monitor configured to display a simulation image simulating the external environment information by the image, the simulation image being photographed by the camera col 18 ln 7-9 the image may be projected in a display area (construed as a display element) by a projector (construed as an optical system), instead of the monitor) in front of an objective lens of the camera to the camera (see claim 1 and col 2 ln 12-15 regarding camera); and
displaying the virtual image by the display device (see claim 1 Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Aono discloses:
A vehicle inspection system for a vehicle including a controller configured to control vehicle speed in an automated manner (see claim 1), based on a forward looking image, the vehicle inspection system comprising:
a vehicle support device configured to support a wheel of the vehicle (see claim 1);
an image generation device configured to acquire a vehicle speed signal of the vehicle supported by the vehicle support device and, in inspection of an automatic braking function, generate a virtual image of an environment seen in a forward direction from the vehicle in such a way that the virtual image synchronizes with the vehicle speed signal (see claim 1);
an obstacle moving in front of the vehicle appears in the virtual image in accordance with a scenario that is determined by a predefined test method (see claim 1); and,
when the vehicle speed is higher than 0, an obstacle in front of the vehicle comes close to the vehicle (see claim 1);
an image display device displaying the virtual image (see claim 1), the image display device being configured to: acquire characteristics of a camera (see claim 1), the camera being mounted on the vehicle and configured to generate the forward looking image (see claim 1), the characteristics being at least any of height from a road surface (see claim 1), an image capturing angle with respect to a travel direction (see claim 1), and a capturable range from a database storing the characteristics of the camera respect to each vehicle type (see claim 1); adjust at least any of height, an angle, and a position in the longitudinal direction of the image display device (see claim 1); and
displays the virtual image in such a way that the camera captures the virtual image (see claim 1); and
a diagnostic device configured to determine whether or not the vehicle stops before an obstacle (col 15 ln 42-45 a series of pieces of relevant information is continuously logged in the inspection device, so that the automated brake function of the vehicle is inspected which is construed as inspecting the successfulness of the function, which in this case would be if the vehicle successfully stopped before an obstacle).
Regarding claim 11, Aono discloses:
The vehicle inspection method according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle inspection method generates the virtual image in accordance with a predefined test method (see claim 1), such that an obstacle appears in front of the vehicle when the vehicle speed is within a vehicle speed range defined by the test method (see claim 1) and accelerator opening is detected to be constant (see claim 4 the vehicle is tested under a constant speed state ).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Please see:
Aono et al. (US Pat. No. 11,828,870 B2) is directed towards a vehicle inspection system that enables inspection of an inspection vehicle provided with electromagnetic sensors having different wavelengths; and
Tian et al. (CN Pat. Pub. No. 113691798 A) is directed towards the application environment where the system includes an environmental simulation device consisting of a vibration generator, a temperature and humidity environment box, a vibrating table, and a room temperature box, a camera turntable, a camera body, a camera post-processing, a test camera, a display screen, a camera simulator, and a controller.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to KEITH ALLEN VON VOLKENBURG whose telephone number is (703)756-5886. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am-5:00 pm.
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, Erin D. Bishop can be reached at (571) 270-3713. 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.
/Keith A von Volkenburg/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights