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 action is in reply to the communication filed on . The disposition of claims is as follows:
Pending:
Rejected:
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being by (), hereinafter “”
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
An apparatus including at least one processor and at least one non-transitory memory including computer program code instructions, the computer program code instructions configured to, when executed, cause the apparatus to: See at least ¶¶
receive location information and motion information associated with a vehicle; See at least ¶¶
determine, from the location information, a map-matched road segment associated with the location information; See at least ¶¶
establish a geometry of the map-matched road segment based on map data of a map database; See at least ¶¶
filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish baseline movement of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determine, during the baseline movement of the vehicle, a steering angle input received at a steering system of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determine, from the steering angle input received at the steering system of the vehicle, a steering angle offset; See at least ¶¶ ; () and
cause the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶ ; ()
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish baseline movement of the vehicle comprises causing the apparatus to: filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a curved profile. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to cause the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle comprises causing the apparatus to command compensation to the steering system of the vehicle in an amount of the steering angle offset. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to determine, from the steering angle input received at the vehicle, a steering angle offset comprises causing the apparatus to: determine steering input angle relative to zero degrees of steering input during the baseline movement of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶; Examiner notes that lateral control error is based on the difference between heading of the vehicle and a steering input of zero degrees.
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to determine, from the location information, the map-matched road segment associated with the location information comprises causing the apparatus to: determine, from the location information, a most likely road segment as the map-matched road segment based on the location information, a speed of the vehicle, and a heading of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
A method () for monitoring a steering system of a vehicle comprising:
receiving location information and motion information associated with a vehicle; See at least ¶¶
determining, from the location information, a map-matched road segment associated with the location information; See at least ¶¶
establishing a geometry of the map-matched road segment based on map data of a map database; See at least ¶¶
filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish a baseline movement of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determining, during the baseline movement of the vehicle, steering angle input received at a steering system of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determining, from the steering angle input received at the steering system of the vehicle, a steering angle offset; See at least ¶¶; () and
causing the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶ ; ()
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish the baseline movement of the vehicle comprises: filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having one or more turns along the map-matched road segment. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein causing the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle comprises commanding compensation to the steering system of the vehicle in an amount of the steering angle offset. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein determining, from the steering angle input received at the vehicle, the steering angle offset comprises: determining steering input angle relative to zero degrees of steering input during the baseline movement of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶; Examiner notes that lateral control error is based on the difference between heading of the vehicle and a steering input of zero degrees.
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein determining, from the location information, the map-matched road segment associated with the location information comprises: determining, from the location information, a most likely road segment as the map-matched road segment based on the location information, a speed of the vehicle, and a heading of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
A system for monitoring a steering system of a vehicle comprising a controller configured to:
receive location information and motion information associated with a vehicle; See at least ¶¶
determine, from the location information, a map-matched road segment associated with the location information; See at least ¶¶
establish a geometry of the map-matched road segment based on map data of a map database; See at least ¶¶
filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish baseline movement of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determine, during the baseline movement of the vehicle, a steering angle input received at a steering system of the vehicle; See at least ¶¶ ; ()
determine, from the steering angle input received at the steering system of the vehicle, a steering angle offset; See at least ¶¶ ; () and
cause the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle. See at least ¶¶ ; ()
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
further comprising a steering assist system, wherein the controller configured to cause the steering angle offset to be applied to the steering system of the vehicle comprises causing the steering assist system to compensate the steering system of the vehicle in an amount of the steering angle offset. See at least ¶¶
Regarding Claim ,
disclose:
wherein the steering assist system comprises at least one of a hydraulic mechanism or an electric mechanism to impart compensation to the steering system of the vehicle in an amount of the steering angle offset. See at least ¶¶0047-0048,
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 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.
Claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over as applied above, in view of (), hereinafter “”.
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
wherein the apparatus is further caused to: provide an indication of required maintenance in response to the steering angle offset satisfying a predetermined value.
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teaches:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of . Namely, the technique of in order to assure proper steering operation. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would in to assure proper steering operation. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over as applied above in view of (), hereinafter “”.
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish baseline movement of the vehicle comprises causing the apparatus to: filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a grade above a predefined measure.
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teach:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of . Namely, the technique of filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a grade above a predefined measure in order correct for the effect of grade on steering. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that in to correct for the effect of grade on steering. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
wherein causing the apparatus to filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish baseline movement of the vehicle comprises causing the apparatus to: filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined to be subject to winds above a predetermined speed.
However, disclose:
filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment. See at least ¶¶
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teach:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of Namely, the technique of filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment in order to correct for wind related environmental alignment effects. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment in to correct for wind related environmental alignment effects. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
wherein filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish the baseline movement of the vehicle comprises: filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a banking above a predefined measure.
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teach:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of Namely, the technique of filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a banking above a predefined measure in order to correct for the effect of grade on steering. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would filter filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment having a banking above a predefined measure in to correct for the effect of grade on steering. See at least ¶¶ ; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim ,
fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to establish the baseline movement of the vehicle comprises: filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined to have winds in excess of a predetermined speed at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment.
However, disclose:
filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment. See at least ¶¶
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teach:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of Namely, the technique of filtering the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment in order to correct for wind related environmental alignment effects. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would filter the motion information associated with the vehicle to remove motion information associated with a map-matched road segment determined on the basis of weather information at a time of traversal of the map-matched road segment in to correct for wind related environmental alignment effects. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over as applied above in view of (), hereinafter “”.
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
determining a need for an alignment service of the steering system in response to the steering angle offset satisfying a predetermined value.
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teaches:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of Namely, the technique of determining a need for an alignment service of the steering system in response to the steering angle offset satisfying a predetermined value in order to assure intended steering operation. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would determining a need for an alignment service of the steering system in response to the steering angle offset satisfying a predetermined value in in order to assure intended steering operation. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Regarding Claim ,
fail to explicitly disclose:
wherein the controller is further configured to: provide an alert in response to the steering angle offset exceeding a predefined degree, wherein the alert comprises an indication of a need for an alignment service.
discloses:
a prior art upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement.
teaches:
a prior art utilizing a known technique applicable to the of Namely, the technique of providing an alert in response to the steering angle offset exceeding a predefined degree, wherein the alert comprises an indication of a need for an alignment service in order to assure intended steering operation. See at least ¶¶.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying the known technique taught by to the of would have yielded predicable results and resulted in an improved . Namely, a that would provide an alert in response to the steering angle offset exceeding a predefined degree, wherein the alert comprises an indication of a need for an alignment service in in order to assure intended steering operation. See at least ¶¶; MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(III)-(IV)
No special definitions are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given the plain meaning to a person of ordinary skill in the art. (See MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01).
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring them to the attention of the Examiner and the prosecution history in the next response.
To date, Applicant has provided no indication of special definitions.
References Cited
R1: ()
R2: ()
R3: ()
R4: ()
Examiner Interviews
Regular Examiner Interview Requests:
Pursuant to USPTO Guidance, one Examiner interview per round of prosecution is available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may call Examiner Reinbold directly at 313-446-6607 (preferred) or 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, Logan Kraft, can be reached on 571-270-5065. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Additional Examiner Interview Requests:
If Applicant needs more than one Examiner interview during a single round of prosecution, applicant may request approval for additional examiner interview(s) from Examiner Reinbold’s Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE), Logan Kraft, who can be reached at 571-270-5065.
Conclusion
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entirety of identified prior art references as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is noted that any citations to specific pages, paragraph numbers, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references presented and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2123. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A REINBOLD whose telephone number is (313)446-6607. The examiner can normally be reached on MON - FRI: 8AM - 5PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Logan Kraft, can be reached on (571)270-5065. 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 http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SCOTT A REINBOLD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747