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 .
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.
Introduction
Claims 1-16 are pending and have been examined in this Office Action. This is the First Office Action on the Merits.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below 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. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety 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. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the disclosure.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1 and 16 recite “automatically travel to a charge in the charging station without intervention of a driver who drives the vehicle in the charging station”. This limitation is unclear and confusing because it can be interpreted as the vehicle is driving without intervention of the driver, but also the driver is driving the vehicle. Worded another way, the driver is and is not driving the vehicle. The Office recommends “without intervention of a human driver to the charging station”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3 and 10-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0016312 to Carlson et al.
As per claim 1, Carlson discloses a control system (Carlson; At least the abstract) comprising:
one or more processors (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 100); and
one or more memories coupled to the one or more processors, the one or more processors being configured to execute processing comprising (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 100):
acquiring dimension information indicating a dimension of a vehicle entering a charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 77 and 86);
generating travel path information indicating a travel path of the vehicle in the charging station, based on the dimension information and coordinate data of locations located in the charging station, the coordinate data of the locations located in the charging station being different from map data that is coordinate data of locations located outside the charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 77; The vehicle is transitioned from real-time trajectory generation to automatic control along a pre-planned route that is adapted to the model of the vehicle, e.g., based on dimensions); and
executing, based on the travel path information, first automatic travel control to control the vehicle to automatically travel to a charger in the charging station without intervention of a driver who drives the vehicle in the charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 75).
As per claim 2, Carlson discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising executing, based on the travel path information, second automatic travel control to control the vehicle to automatically travel from the charger to an exit of the charging station without the intervention of the driver in the charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 55 and 78).
As per claim 3, Carlson discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising generating the travel path information, based on a positional relationship between a reference position of the vehicle and a reference position in the charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 77; the path is generated based on position of the vehicle being at the position of the boundary).
As per claims 10-12, Carlson discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising generating the travel path information, based on information related to a battery of the vehicle (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 79 and 80).
As per claims 13-15, Carlson discloses wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising generating the travel path information, based on information related to software used in the vehicle for charging (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 79-81).
As per claim 16, Carlson discloses a control device comprising:
one or more processors (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 100); and
one or more memories coupled to the one or more processors (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 100),
the one or more processors being configured to execute processing comprising:
executing first automatic travel control to control a vehicle entering a charging station to automatically travel to a charger in the charging station without intervention of a driver who drives the vehicle in the charging station, the first automatic travel control being executed based on travel path information indicating a travel path of the vehicle in the charging station, the travel path information being generated based on dimension information indicating a dimension of the vehicle and coordinate data of locations located in the charging station, the coordinate data of the locations located in the charging station being different from map data that is coordinate data of locations located outside the charging station (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 75, 77, and 86).
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.
Claim(s) 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlson in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0256838 to Horvath et al.
As per claims 4-6, Carlson discloses guiding a vehicle, based on vehicle parameters, to orient and position the vehicle adjacent to a charging station in charging bay to accept a fuel interface (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 77). Therefore, one in the art would understand that the system of Carlson uses information related to a position of a charging port of the vehicle in order to orient and position the vehicle for charging. Since Carlson does not explicitly state this, Horvath teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising generating the travel path information, based on information related to a position of a charging port of the vehicle (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 15-17).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Horvath into the invention of Carlson with a reasonable expectation of success with the motivation of using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way with predictable results. Generating the travel path based on the position of the charging port ensures that the vehicle is moved into the charging bay in the correct orientation so that charging can actually be accomplished. A wrong orientation would require repositioning of the vehicle, which would waste time and energy, and would increase the chance of damage to the vehicle.
As per claims 7-9, Carlson discloses guiding a vehicle, based on vehicle parameters, to orient and position the vehicle adjacent to a charging station in charging bay to accept a fuel interface (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 77). Therefore, one in the art would understand that the system of Carlson uses information related to the charger in order to orient and position the vehicle for charging. Since Carlson does not explicitly state this, Horvath teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute processing comprising generating the travel path information, based on information related to a position of a charging port of the vehicle (Carlson; At least paragraph(s) 15-17).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Horvath into the invention of Carlson with a reasonable expectation of success with the motivation of using a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way with predictable results. Generating the travel path based on the charger parameters ensures that the vehicle is moved into the charging bay in the correct orientation and position so that charging can actually be accomplished. A wrong orientation would require repositioning of the vehicle, which would waste time and energy, and would increase the chance of damage to the vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. The prior art shows the state of the art. The prior art show various systems to automatically guide a vehicle to a charging station.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID P MERLINO whose telephone number is (571)272-8362. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30am-3:00pm F 5:30-9:00 am ET.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
/David P. Merlino/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665