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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-7, 10 and 11 in the reply filed on 05-28-2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8 and 9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05-28-2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 11 is drawn to a computer readable medium having stored thereon a computer program, where the computer readable medium can be transitory, i.e., is not explicitly limited as disclosed as only being non-transitory computer readable media; therefore, fail(s) to fall within a statutory category of invention. Applicant should note that adding "non-transitory" to the claim to limit a claimed computer readable medium to being statutory would be acceptable.
A claim directed to a computer readable (or “storage”) medium having stored thereon a computer program is non-statutory, where the computer readable medium can be a signal, a carrier wave, or a data structure, per se, which are non-statutory as noted, infra.
A claim directed to a signal, a carrier wave, or a data structure, per se, is non-statutory because it is not:
A process, or
A machine, or
A manufacture, or
A composition of matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by OGAWA (US 2023/0332920) .
The applied reference has a common assignee/applicant/inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claims 1 10 and 11,
OGAWA teaches a control method/executed instruction via program/a vehicle-mounted apparatus, the apparatus configured to be mounted in a vehicle ([0028] teaches a system wherein "...it is important to constantly update information to be used and maintain the accuracy (the degree of certainty)...Driving assistance based on old information is meaningless... information that has been acquired or generated for a relatively long time is different from the actual traffic situation, and it is preferable to prevent such information from being used for automated driving"), the vehicle-mounted apparatus comprising: a processor configured to:
determine a real-time requirement relating to received data that has been received from outside the vehicle ([0045] teaches utilizing data having degree of certainty, wherein the degree of certainty is a degree of freshness of the dynamic information, the dynamic information includes a generation time and an expiration time of the dynamic information as the degree of freshness, said degree of certainty/freshness corresponding to “real-time requirement”);
calculate an elapsed period that is a time from generation of original data for the received data until the received data is received by the vehicle-mounted apparatus ([0045] teaches that the dynamic information includes a generation time of the dynamic information; [0036] teaches that a vehicle-mounted apparatus may further includes an estimation processing unit configured to estimate for the dynamic object, displacement of the dynamic object during a period from a present time to a time when a predetermined time elapses);
calculate an estimation period from reception of the received data until usage of the received data commences ([0082] teaches that the degree of freshness of the dynamic map is determined by evaluating the degree of freshness of the dynamic information for each dynamic object included in each grid region, said degree of freshness thus corresponding to the period from reception until usage); and
determine whether the received data is usable based on the real-time requirement, the elapsed period, and the estimation period ([0055] teaches an expiration time which represents an upper limit time during which the dynamic information can be effectively used after the dynamic information is generated, said expiration time corresponding to a determination of useability), wherein:
the real-time requirement indicates a tolerated delay from generation of the original data to the usage of the received data ([0045] teaches that the degree of certainty/freshness of the dynamic information includes an expiration time of the dynamic information, said expiration time corresponding at least in-part to a tolerated delay from generation),
the received data has been appended with time information for specifying a time when the original data was generated ([0082] teaches that dynamic information is associated with generation time data), and
the processor calculates the elapsed period based on a reception time of the received data and the time information ([0141] teaches comparing the elapsed time from the latest update time to the present time with a predetermined threshold value (expiration time of the dynamic map) and further teaches determining that when the elapsed time is equal to or greater than the threshold value, it is determined that the dynamic map needs to be updated, and when the elapsed time is less than the threshold value, it is determined that the dynamic map does not need to be updated.)
Regarding claim 2,
Ogawa teaches that the processor is configured to: determine that the received data is unusable if a total of the elapsed period and the estimation period does not satisfy the real-time requirement ([0082]-[0085], [0090]); and convert, based on a determination that the received data is unusable, the received data into low-requirement data with a lower real-time requirement than the real-time requirement of the received data ([0102] teaches determining whether dynamic map can be complemented by estimation processing thus converted), wherein when the processor is not capable of generating the low-requirement data, the received data is discarded (see [0087], [0090], [0110]; [0087] teaches that when complementation cannot be performed, only the current dynamic remains thus data which would have been used for complementation is discarded).
Regarding claim 5,
Ogawa teaches that the type includes dynamic information ([0061] teaches that ECU 124 can communicate with an external apparatus through vehicle-mounted gateway 122 and communication unit 128. Vehicle inside-outside coordination unit 120 acquires a dynamic map and data (sensor data, an analysis result of the sensor data, and the like) used to generate the dynamic map out of information received from the outside via communication unit 128, and updates the dynamic map as will be described later), predictive information ([0087] teaches that estimation processing unit 210 complements the dynamic map using the estimation result. The dynamic map can be complemented by adding these estimation results to the dynamic map, said estimation results corresponding to predictive information), and statistical information ([0102] teaches generating dynamic information after the current time by using past dynamic information, understood as requiring statistical analysis to generate future dynamic information) and the service includes driving assistance including control of a driving speed of the vehicle, drive planning including control of a lane in which the vehicle is running, and route selection for controlling the planned driving route of the vehicle ([0087] teaches a future (within the predetermined time from the current time) moving route, moving speed, and the like are estimated; and [0089] teaches that the positional information such as GPS data is input from information acquisition unit 200, planned-travel-section identifying unit 220 uses the positional information to identify the current position of vehicle 102a and a planned travel section in the future i.e., driving assistance).
Regarding claim 7,
Ogawa teaches a vehicle-mounted system configured to be mounted in a vehicle, the vehicle-mounted system comprising: the vehicle-mounted apparatus according to claim 1 (Ogawa teaches a vehicle mounted apparatus ECU for receiving a dynamic map and to process information for automated driving); a communicator configured to receive the received data ([0060]-[0064] teaches receiving dynamic map data from an external source into the vehicle for use by the ECU); and
an electronic control unit to which the received data that has been determined by the vehicle-mounted apparatus to be usable is transferred ([0089] teaches that the complemented dynamic map outputs data freshness to determination unit; [0090] teaches determining whether the degree of freshness is sufficient wherein “useable data” is interpreted as corresponding to data which is determined to have sufficient freshness or data complemented so that it can be used.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over OGAWA (US 2023/0332920) in view of LEE (US 2026/0019981).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 3,
Ogawa teaches the vehicle-mounted apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to expressly teach that the received data is appended with service specifying information for specifying a service where the received data is to be used, and the processor determines the real-time requirement based on the service specifying information.
LEE teaches a method for sending and receiving signals wherein the received data is appended with service specifying information for specifying a service where the received data is to be used ([0163] associates information with an emergency location service), and the processor determines the real-time requirement based on the service specifying information ([0158] and [0159] teaches that QoS dictates timing and latency requirements).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the vehicle system of Ogawa to determine the real-time requirement based upon service specifying information because different service have different communication latency and quality requirements therefore it is beneficial to determine real-time requirements based on the service form which data shall be used.
Regarding claim 4,
Lee teaches that the processor determines the real-time requirement based on at least one of a type of the received data and a service where the received data is to be used ([0090] teaches a system wherein the information transmitted and received between the UE and the base station includes general data information and various types of control information. There are many physical channels according to the types/usages of information transmitted and received between the base station and the UE." thus teaching multiple types of received information and different channels selected according to said types/usages. Since different channels are selected based upon the type of information, the system will need to distinguish between both latency and transmission requirements associated with those respective information types, thus the applicable timing (real-time requirement) will be determined according to said type of received information as recited.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the vehicle system of Ogawa to determine the real-time requirement based upon data type because different types of information have different latency sensitivities and communication priorities. therefore determining a real-time requirement according thereto would improve communication efficiency and reduce unnecessary processing of latency insensitive data.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 6,
The prior art of record fails to further teach the vehicle-mounted apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the received data is used by an electronic control unit mounted in the vehicle, the processor calculates the estimation period by adding a transfer delay, which is a time required to transfer the received data to the electronic control unit, a standby period, which is a time required for the vehicle to reach a position where the received data is to be used, and a predetermined time, and the predetermined time represents a total of a processing time of the processor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONNE PENDLETON whose telephone number is (571)272-7497. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5pm.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/DIONNE PENDLETON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights