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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to applicant’s filing on September 19, 2024. Claims 1-19 are pending.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: DRIVING DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR CALCULATING AN ACCELERATION TIME AND SPEED DIFFERENCE.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,110,023 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed subject matter substantially overlaps as shown below.
Current Application
US 12,110,023 B2
1. A driving device control method, comprising:
1. A driving device control method, comprising:
determining whether a driving device is currently in an automatic driving state;
determining whether a driving device is currently in an automatic driving state;
receiving an output signal of an acceleration controller in real time upon determining that the driving device is in the automatic driving state;
receiving an output signal of an acceleration controller in real time upon determining that the driving device is in the automatic driving state;
generating a simulated acceleration control signal based on the output signal of the acceleration controller;
generating a simulated acceleration control signal based on the output signal of the acceleration controller;
and controlling a drive apparatus of the driving device based on the simulated acceleration control signal;
and controlling a drive apparatus of the driving device based on the simulated acceleration control signal,
wherein the driving device is a vehicle;
(Claim 13) the driving device is a vehicle;
and the controlling of the drive apparatus of the driving device based on the simulated acceleration control signal comprises:
the controlling of the drive apparatus of the driving device based on the simulated acceleration control signal includes:
obtaining a speed limit of a current road section and a current real-time speed of the vehicle,
obtaining a speed limit of a current road section and a current real-time speed of the vehicle,
calculating a speed difference based on the speed limit and the real-time speed,
calculating a speed difference based on the speed limit and the real-time speed,
calculating an acceleration time based on the simulated acceleration control signal and the speed difference,
calculating an acceleration time based on the simulated acceleration control signal and the speed difference, and
and controlling, based on the acceleration time, a driving speed resulted from acceleration of the vehicle not to exceed the speed limit.
controlling, based on the acceleration time, a driving speed resulted from acceleration of the vehicle not to exceed the speed limit.
Claim 2 corresponds to claims 1 and 13.
Claim 3 corresponds to claims 1, 13 and 2.
Claim 4 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 2, 3.
Claim 4 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 2, 3.
Claim 5 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 4.
Claim 6 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 5.
Claim 7 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6.
Claim 8 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 14.
Claim 9 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7.
Claim 10 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7, 8.
Claim 11 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7, 8, 9.
Claim 12 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7, 10.
Claim 13 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7, 10, 11.
Claim 14 corresponds to claims 1, 13, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12.
Claims 15 and 16 are independent claims that mirror claim 1 above and therefore correspond to claims 1 and 13.
Claim 17 mirrors claim 2 above and therefore corresponds to claims 1 and 13.
Claim 18 mirrors claim 3 above and therefore corresponds to claims 1, 13 and 2.
Claim 19 mirrors claim 4 above and therefore corresponds to claims 1, 13, 2, 3.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under Double Patenting set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN P SWEENEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4906. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30AM to 5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James J. Lee, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-5965. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/BRIAN P SWEENEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights