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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 04/17/2026. Claims 1-14 are pending. Claims 1 and 8-9 have been amended. Claims 11-14 have been added. The objection to claim 8 has been withdrawn in light of the instant amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 04/17/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jiang (US 20200125102 A1).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 3 filed on 04/17/2026, the branch between S20 and S50 is labeled as “J”. Par. 74 of the specification states “If it is determined during the check according to step S20 that there are more than two driving trajectories 10, 12 within the driving corridor 22 (Y), the process is continued in a step S50”. “J” should be changed back to “Y”, as it was in the original Fig. 3 filed on 09/13/2024. 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.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiang (US 20200125102 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang teaches a method for validating a driving corridor (Fig. 7A-7C, road segment 700) for lateral guidance of a motor vehicle by a driver assistance system (par. 1, “autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles”), the method comprising:
determining, based on environmental data corresponding to an environment of the motor vehicle, corridor boundaries of the driving corridor (par. 42, "Perception module 302 may include a computer vision system or functionalities of a computer vision system to process and analyze images captured by one or more cameras in order to identify objects and/or features in the environment of autonomous vehicle. The objects can include traffic signals, road way boundaries, other vehicles, pedestrians, and/or obstacles, etc."), wherein the corridor boundaries specify a first track width for the lateral guidance of the motor vehicle (par. 44, “For each of the objects, decision module 304 makes a decision regarding how to handle the object”—the decision module uses the data analyzed in the perception module to make decisions);
checking whether more than one driving trajectory is provided within the corridor boundaries, by determining whether a plurality of data points is located along a predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle relative to a direction of travel of the motor vehicle (see Fig. 7A-7C; par. 57, “FIG. 7A shows a road segment that is typically provided by a standard navigation map…there is no lane configuration provided by the navigation map such as a number of lanes and the lane width of the lanes, etc.”—the lanes are determined using trajectory information, as shown by Fig. 7B and 7C. The two determined trajectories are two separate data points along the width of the road, the width direction being the same as a lateral axis of the motor vehicle relative to the direction of travel), wherein each of the data points is assigned to a different driving trajectory and indicates at least geocoordinates of the different driving trajectory (par. 59, “For each set of the trajectory sets 701-702, a lane reference line is calculated, for example, by calculating an averaged trajectory amongst all of the trajectories, such as, for example, lane reference lines 721-722 as shown in FIG. 7C”) in a predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle (Fig. 9, step 901 through 904—a request is sent to determine lane configuration information for a road segment the autonomous vehicle is traversing on);
and validating, based on a result of the checking, the driving corridor by using the first track width specified by the corridor boundaries for the lateral guidance of the motor vehicle (par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"; par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin"—if only one trajectory is determined, then the lane width would just be the road width).
Regarding claim 2, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 1. Jiang further teaches the driving corridor is only validated if exactly one data point within the driving corridor is determined according to the checking (see Fig. 7A-7C; par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"—if only one trajectory is detected, then the road segment will not be divided).
Regarding claim 3, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 1. comprising: falsifying the driving corridor based on a result of the checking when at least two data points within the driving corridor are determined according to the determining (Fig. 7C, two trajectories), wherein the falsifying includes determining a second track width different from the first track width and using the second track width for the lateral guidance of the motor vehicle (par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"; par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin".
Regarding claim 4, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 3. Jiang further teaches determining a data point spacing of the at least two data points along the predetermined lateral axis (Fig. 7C shows spacing of the two trajectories); and determining the second track width based on the data point spacing (par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin").
Regarding claim 5, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 3. Jiang further teaches the second track width is narrower than the first track width (par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"; par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin"—the road segment width is divided by the number of trajectories, so each new lane width would obviously be smaller than the road segment width).
Regarding claim 6, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 3. Jiang further teaches a value of the first track width and/or the second track width is selected according to a predetermined selection criterion as a function of a parameter of at least two travel trajectories within the driving corridor or as a function of a parameter of the driving corridor (par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"; par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin"—the widths are determined by the trajectories and the road segment width).
Regarding claim 7, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 3. Jiang further teaches each of the data points contains information for an authorized driving direction along the different driving trajectory and the method further includes determining the second track width based on the authorized driving direction relative to a driving direction of the motor vehicle (par. 19, "In one embodiment, the trajectories of the vehicles were observed by one or more sensors of one or more ADVs when those vehicles were also driving within the same road. The ADVs are equipped with one or more cameras that can observe how other vehicles were driving (e.g., paths, speeds, heading directions) at different points in time within the road. The lane configuration data structure stores a number of lane reference lines of a number of road segment of a variety of roads. Each of the reference lines is generated based on the prior trajectories of vehicles navigating through a corresponding road segment without using an HD map").
Regarding claim 8, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 1. Jiang further teaches determining the driving trajectory or an additional driving trajectory of the motor vehicle from swarm data, wherein the swarm data includes an external trajectory of at least one external vehicle that has already passed through the driving corridor (par. 58 and Fig. 7B, “FIG. 7B shows the trajectories that have been projected onto the road segment of the navigation map, where the trajectories represent the paths a number of vehicles have driven through the same road segment for a period of time”).
Regarding claim 9, Jiang teaches a driver assistance system for lateral guidance of a motor vehicle (par. 1, “autonomous driving using a standard navigation map and lane configuration that is determined based on prior trajectories of vehicles”), the driver assistance system comprising:
at least one processor (par. 32, “Perception and planning system 110 includes the necessary hardware (e.g., processor(s)”);
and at least one memory storing program code (par. 32, “Perception and planning system 110 includes the necessary hardware (e.g., processor(s), memory, storage) and software (e.g., operating system, planning and routing programs)”) that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the driver assistance system to:
determine, based on environmental data corresponding to an environment of the motor vehicle, corridor boundaries of a driving corridor (par. 42, "Perception module 302 may include a computer vision system or functionalities of a computer vision system to process and analyze images captured by one or more cameras in order to identify objects and/or features in the environment of autonomous vehicle. The objects can include traffic signals, road way boundaries, other vehicles, pedestrians, and/or obstacles, etc."), wherein the corridor boundaries specify a first track width for the lateral guidance of the motor vehicle (par. 44, “For each of the objects, decision module 304 makes a decision regarding how to handle the object”—the decision module uses the data analyzed in the perception module to make decisions);
check whether more than one driving trajectory is provided within the corridor boundaries, by determining whether a plurality of data points is located along a predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle relative to a direction of travel of the motor vehicle (see Fig. 7A-7C; par. 57, “FIG. 7A shows a road segment that is typically provided by a standard navigation map…there is no lane configuration provided by the navigation map such as a number of lanes and the lane width of the lanes, etc.”—the lanes are determined using trajectory information, as shown by Fig. 7B and 7C. The two determined trajectories are two separate data points along the width of the road, the width direction being the same as a lateral axis of the motor vehicle relative to the direction of travel), wherein each of the data points is assigned to a different driving trajectory and indicates at least geocoordinates of the different driving trajectory (par. 59, “For each set of the trajectory sets 701-702, a lane reference line is calculated, for example, by calculating an averaged trajectory amongst all of the trajectories, such as, for example, lane reference lines 721-722 as shown in FIG. 7C”) in a predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle (Fig. 9, step 901 through 904—a request is sent to determine lane configuration information for a road segment the autonomous vehicle is traversing on);
and validate, based on a result of the check, the driving corridor by using the first track width specified by the corridor boundaries for the lateral guidance of the motor vehicle (par. 60, "the lane width of each lane may also be determined, for example by evenly dividing the detected lanes. Furthermore, a lane boundary of a most left or most right lane can be determined, for example, by measuring the trajectories"; par. 20, "the lane width may be determined based on the lateral distance between two most outward trajectories plus a predetermined buffer distance or margin"—if only one trajectory is determined, then the lane width would just be the road width).
Regarding claim 10, Jiang teaches a motor vehicle including the driver assistance system according to claim 9 (par. 6, “FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of an autonomous vehicle according to one embodiment”).
Regarding claim 12, Jiang teaches the driver assistance system according to claim 9. Jiang further teaches the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle corresponds to an axle of the motor vehicle (see Fig. 7A-7C; par. 57, “FIG. 7A shows a road segment that is typically provided by a standard navigation map…there is no lane configuration provided by the navigation map such as a number of lanes and the lane width of the lanes, etc.”—the lanes are determined using trajectory information, as shown by Fig. 7B and 7C. The two determined trajectories are two separate data points along the width of the road, the width direction being the same direction as an axle of the motor vehicle that is traversing the road).
Regarding claim 14, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 1. Jiang further teaches the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle corresponds to an axle of the motor vehicle (see Fig. 7A-7C; par. 57, “FIG. 7A shows a road segment that is typically provided by a standard navigation map…there is no lane configuration provided by the navigation map such as a number of lanes and the lane width of the lanes, etc.”—the lanes are determined using trajectory information, as shown by Fig. 7B and 7C. The two determined trajectories are two separate data points along the width of the road, the width direction being the same direction as an axle of the motor vehicle that is traversing the road).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang in view of Kim (US 20230124981 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Jiang teaches the driver assistance system according to claim 9. Jiang fails to teach an origin of the predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle is a point at which the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle and a predetermined longitudinal axis of the motor vehicle intersect. Jiang only teaches that the vehicle is an autonomous vehicle that is capable of traversing a trajectory, which would obviously include a reference system to keep track of the autonomous vehicle’s position in relation to a trajectory. However, Jiang does not disclose anything about what the origin of the reference system is.
However, Kim teaches an origin of the predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle is a point at which the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle and a predetermined longitudinal axis of the motor vehicle intersect (Fig. 3, center point 306; par. 45, “The longitudinal axis 304 extends through a center of the vehicle 302 along the length (as measured front-to-back) of the vehicle 302. The center point 306 represents a center of gravity or pivot point of the vehicle 302…The vehicle 302 may actually be traveling on or along the reference path 308, in which case the vehicle 302 may be controlled so that the center point 306 of the vehicle 302 follows the reference path 308 as closely as possible”).
While Kim does not relate to determining lanes in a road corridor, Kim does relate to control of autonomous vehicles. Kim teaches that a center point, which would be an intersecting point of a lateral and longitudinal axis of the vehicle, is used as a reference point to control the vehicle along a trajectory. Choosing a center point as the origin of a reference system would have been an obvious choice for an autonomous vehicle and would predictably allow the vehicle to follow the trajectory while centered along it.
Regarding claim 13, Jiang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an origin of the predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle is a point at which the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle and a predetermined longitudinal axis of the motor vehicle intersect. Jiang only teaches that the vehicle is an autonomous vehicle that is capable of traversing a trajectory, which would obviously include a reference system to keep track of the autonomous vehicle’s position in relation to a trajectory. However, Jiang does not disclose anything about what the origin of the reference system is.
However, Kim teaches an origin of the predetermined reference system of the motor vehicle is a point at which the predetermined lateral axis of the motor vehicle and a predetermined longitudinal axis of the motor vehicle intersect (Fig. 3, center point 306; par. 45, “The longitudinal axis 304 extends through a center of the vehicle 302 along the length (as measured front-to-back) of the vehicle 302. The center point 306 represents a center of gravity or pivot point of the vehicle 302…The vehicle 302 may actually be traveling on or along the reference path 308, in which case the vehicle 302 may be controlled so that the center point 306 of the vehicle 302 follows the reference path 308 as closely as possible”).
While Kim does not relate to determining lanes in a road corridor, Kim does relate to control of autonomous vehicles. Kim teaches that a center point, which would be an intersecting point of a lateral and longitudinal axis of the vehicle, is used as a reference point to control the vehicle along a trajectory. Choosing a center point as the origin of a reference system would have been an obvious choice for an autonomous vehicle and would predictably allow the vehicle to follow the trajectory while centered along it.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gonzalez (US 20200167576 A1) teaches a system for determining one or more lanes of a road using a plurality of trajectories.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/M.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights