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
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 14, and 19, drawn to the scheduling movement of vehicles and were elected by the applicant.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 8-10, 12, 13 and 15-18 and have been withdrawn.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 14, and 19 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
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. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms. The words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the specification. 2111.01 (I). See also In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("'[C]laims are not to be read in a vacuum, and limitations therein are to be interpreted in light of the specification in giving them their ‘broadest reasonable interpretation.'"2111.01 (II).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 7 is dependent on Claim 1 which does not describe or indicate a table of layers which is indicated in the withdrawn Claim 6. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. [US 20200294394, now Guo], with S. Dolev, E. Gudes and H. Yair, "Automatic Real Time Platoon Formation Using the Road Graph," 2021 IEEE 20th International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications (NCA), Boston, MA, USA, 2021, pp. 1-4, now Dolev. [in IDS].
Claim 1
Guo discloses a method for efficient real-time traffic management of controllable autonomic and non-autonomic vehicles, moving between sources and destinations [see at least Guo, abstract], comprising:
a) scheduling and synchronizing the movement of autonomic and non- autonomic vehicles approaching junctions between source and destination [see at least Guo, Fig. 4; ¶ 0021 (indicates solving the motion scheduling problem in real time); 0055 (discusses joint vehicle control using sequencing (also includes synchronizing) and [Fig. 4] “shows a functional block diagram of a method for performing a joint vehicle control at the control point according to some embodiments.”); Note: Thus showing, especially in steps 410-430 the actions of scheduling and synchronizing the movement of vehicles];
b) displaying to the driver of each non-autonomic vehicle or transmitting to each autonomic vehicle, the speed required for allowing said vehicle to cross each junction without stopping, while eliminating conflicts with other vehicles, for achieving non-stop junctions [see at least Guo, ¶ 0078 (“to connect the system 900 to a display device, such as a computer monitor, camera, television, projector, or mobile device, among others.”); 0089; 0090 (also indicate a display device is available); and
c) scheduling and synchronizing the movement of a plurality of vehicles that join and leave the traffic, for allowing a non-stop movement from source to destination [see at least Guo, ¶ 0059 (indicates the same concept in more detailed manner for allowing non-stop movement of a group of vehicles).
Dolev teaches the concepts and calculations of control a platoon of vehicles and indicates can be used in scheduling groups of vehicles in at least the Abstract, Introduction and Conclusion. The formulas indicated in Section III are performing similar calculations as those in the instant claims.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “joint control of vehicles [TI]”using traffic configuration of Guo, with the “identification and managing [Abstract] of traffic platoons discussed in detail in Dolev. Providing an effective, efficient and safer techniques for managing a Platoon/caravan of vehicles in area that have controlled intersections.
Claim 2
Guo and Dolev disclose/teach the method of Claim 1.
Guo further discloses a) collecting data regarding source and destination of each vehicle; b) generating for each vehicle, based on the data collected for all other vehicles, an optimal path from its corresponding source to destination that allows a non-stop movement from source to destination [see at least Guo, Fig. 4, step 450 (“Before vehicles enter the control zone, the IoV-Edge determines vehicle motion trajectory for each vehicle 450 and sends motion trajectory to vehicle 460. Once vehicles enter the control zone, the IoV-Edge may keep updating motion trajectory 470 to adapt for instant information change. The updated trajectory is sent to vehicle if it is necessary.”)].
3. (Withdrawn)
4. (Withdrawn)
Claim 5
Guo and Dolev disclose/teach the method of Claim 1.
Guo further discloses generating virtual traffic policies including real-time generation of virtual signs that are transmitted or displayed to each controllable vehicle from a traffic management center and/or a programmable road sign [see at least Guo, ¶ 0003 (discusses the concept of traffic management)].
Guo does not specifically disclose but Dolev teaches this limitation [see at least Dolev, Abstract, Introduction (indicate traffic policies are an important aspect of traffic management); Section III: Traffic signs policies (discusses virtual signs and “These policies can be used by a traffic controller at a control center which gets information on road conditions, accidents, traffic jams, etc., in an entire region.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “joint control of vehicles [TI]”using traffic configuration of Guo, with the “identification and managing [Abstract] of traffic platoons discussed in detail in Dolev. Providing an effective, efficient and safer techniques for managing a Platoon/caravan of vehicles in area that have controlled intersections.
6. (Withdrawn)
Claim 7
Guo and Dolev disclose/teach the method of Claim 1.
But this claim should be dependent on Claim 6 and, as indicated above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d).
A method according to claim 1, wherein the table of layers is generated in a preprocessing offline, using dynamic programming.
8. (Withdrawn
9. (Withdrawn)
10. (Withdrawn)
Claim 11
Guo and Dolev disclose/teach the method of Claim 5
Guo further discloses/suggests the concepts within this limitation [see at least Guo, ¶ 0002 (discusses managing traffic flow, which includes lane control); 0074 (distance between vehicles); 0079 (“instructions”)].
Guo does not specifically disclose but Dolev does specifically teach many of these virtual traffic policies. Dolev teaches the virtual traffic policies comprise one or more of the following:- the same driving instructions given to the leading vehicle at a particular point along the road are given to the other platoon members when they arrive at the same particular point [see at least Dolev, Section IIIA (“Lead a group of vehicles traveling on the same route when the first vehicle in the platoon is driven by the remote driver and the rest of the vehicles follow the vehicle’s behavior of those that are in front of them. Namely, driving instructions given by the human driver to the leading vehicle at a particular point along the road, are given to the other platoon members when they arrive at the same particular point.“);
all the vehicles in the platoon get the same Maximum Speed limit [see at least Dolev, Section IIIA];
all the vehicles in the platoon which are on the same lane will move at the same speed; Lane blocking for all kind of vehicles [see at least Dolev, Section IIIA (indicates specific lanes for a platoon. “We control the traffic policies and change them according to the scenario by the different algorithms. Due to space limitations, the detailed implementations of the algorithms are omitted from this version.”)];
Distance keeping among vehicles in a platoon [see at least Dolev, Section II (indicates Platoon formation)];
Reversing lane direction ; directing vehicle to use detour through emergency lanes and reversed lane of the opposite direction road using Virtual Traffic Lights [see at least Dolev, Section III]; real-time generation of virtual signs that are transmitted to each controllable vehicle from a traffic management center and/or a programmable road sign [see at least Dolev, Section III].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “joint control of vehicles [TI]”using traffic configuration of Guo, with the “identification and managing [Abstract] of traffic platoons discussed in detail in Dolev. Providing an effective, efficient and safer techniques for managing a Platoon/caravan of vehicles in area that have controlled intersections.
12. (Withdrawn)
13. (Withdrawn)
Claim 14
Guo and Dolev disclose/teach the method of Claim 1.
Guo further discloses/suggests the concepts scheduling is performed by: a) at each given time-unit t, collecting all of the vehicles that are close to the junction at distance D [see at least Dolev, ; b) for every vehicle in a batch, checking the possibility of joining to an existing layer that was received by the previous batches scheduling their crossing time [see at least Dolev,); c) allowing vehicles from a current batch to join previous layers; d) updating said current batch with a reduced set of vehicles; e) obtaining the optimal separation into new layers from the table, for the remaining vehicles ;f) determining the crossing time T for each layer; g) For each layer in the current batch that has passed the junction, setting an indication when the junction is empty; and h) updating the vehicle velocity by the distance and their calculated crossing time[see at least Guo, ¶ 0021 (“solve the motion scheduling problem in real time.” and time); 0023 (time and velocity); 0024-0025 (jointly controlling vehicles); 0049 (reduced number of vehicles)].
Guo does not specifically disclose but Dolev does specifically scheduling is performed by: a) at each given time-unit t, collecting all of the vehicles that are close to the junction at distance D; b) for every vehicle in a batch, checking the possibility of joining to an existing layer that was received by the previous batches scheduling their crossing time; c) allowing vehicles from a current batch to join previous layers; d) updating said current batch with a reduced set of vehicles; e) obtaining the optimal separation into new layers from the table, for the remaining vehicles ; f) determining the crossing time T for each layer; g) For each layer in the current batch that has passed the junction, setting an indication when the junction is empty; and h) updating the vehicle velocity by the distance and their calculated crossing time [see at least Dolev, abstract; Introduction; Section II; Section III; conclusion.]
15. (Withdrawn)
16. (Withdrawn)
17. (Withdrawn)
18. (Withdrawn)
Claim 19
Claim 19 has similar limitations to claim 1, therefore claim 19 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOAN T GOODBODY whose telephone number is (571) 270-7952. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 7-3 (US Eastern time).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RACHID BENDIDI can be reached at (571) 272-4896. The Fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspot.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from the USPTO Customer Serie Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/JOAN T GOODBODY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
(571) 270-7952
Prosecution Insights