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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Calculation unit (Applicant’s specification [0086] a calculation unit (16a, S7040,) in claim(s) 1, 4, 5; and
Arithmetic unit (Applicant’s specification [0086] an arithmetic unit (16a, S7040)in claim(s) 1-5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goudy (US 20140149031 A1) in view of Kawamata (WO 2013145274 A1).
Claim 1. Goudy teaches a driving assistance device mounted on a vehicle capable of communicating with another vehicle, the driving assistance device comprising:
a calculation unit configured to calculate a travel route of the other vehicle based on a result of the communication with the other vehicle
([0024]-[0026] [0033] the controller 22 is at least programmed to control the vehicle intersection monitoring system 12 in accordance with the flow charts of FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 38 as discussed below...a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) application 100,...basic safety messages (BSM)...each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following...a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading
[0065] FIG. 33 is a diagram illustrating the relationship between the location of the host vehicle 10 and the location of the remote vehicle 14 and the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14...All of the values for the latitude and longitude can be expressed in radians.);
and an arithmetic unit configured to determine whether the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle traveling on the calculated travel route, and generate a notification signal for notifying that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle when it is determined that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle
([0037] The threat information generated by the threat/notify/warn application 112 can list all of the identified remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and include BSM information from the remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and the types of alerts and warnings attributed to those remote vehicles 14.
[0064]-[0068][ the controller 22 can extract the GPS and BSM information from the data packet to use that information to identify the scenario as discussed above with regard to FIGS. 4 through 30... the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14....In other words, H.sub.threshold represents the threshold value that determines whether the remote vehicle 14 should be considered to be a possible threat vehicle.
[0084]-[0085]Thus, by performing the operations in FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 36, the controller 22 selects an intersection scenario from a plurality of intersection scenarios based on the host vehicle information and the remote vehicle information, and monitors a location relationship between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 according to an algorithm that is determined based on the selected intersection scenario... In the flowchart in FIG. 37, the processing calculates the time to collision (TTC) beginning in step 6000. Thus, the processing determines whether to provide a warning to the host vehicle 10 by evaluating an operating condition of the host vehicle 10 while the possibility of contact exists between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14.
(e.g. arithmetic is being performed by the controller which performs collision warning steps are performed (Fig. 37) when it is deemed necessary of a potential collision)).
Goudy further discloses using assisting devices for a vehicle but does not specifically disclose wherein the arithmetic unit is deactivated when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self-vehicle
However, Kawamata teaches wherein the arithmetic unit is deactivated when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self-vehicle.
(Fig. 7; Page 8- When it is determined that it is not (step ST102, No determination), or when it is determined that the preceding vehicle 120 is present (step ST103, Yes determination), the support device is deactivated (step ST105). That is, the support execution unit 100 is configured not to perform driving support control such as alerting control, braking control, and steering control.
Page 9- For this reason, even when the vehicle speed becomes low, driving assistance is prohibited when the preceding vehicle 120 is detected within a predetermined distance from the host vehicle 1, and driving assistance is executed only when the preceding vehicle 120 is not detected.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use deactivation of the arithmetic unit as taught by Kawamata within the system of Goudy for the purpose of enhancing the driving assistance device to conserve energy consumption when driving support is not necessary..
Claim 2. Goudy and Kawamata teach the driving assistance device according to claim 1, wherein, when the preceding vehicle is located between the self-vehicle and the other vehicle, the arithmetic unit inhibits generation of the notification signal
(Page 8- If it is determined by the support condition determination unit 98 that the vehicle stops at the no-signal intersection 114 or enters the no-signal intersection 114 (Yes in step ST102), whether there is a preceding vehicle 120 or not. Is determined (step ST103). That is, based on the sound information detected by the traveling sound sensor 32, information on other vehicles around the host vehicle 1 including the preceding vehicle 120 is acquired by the other vehicle information acquisition unit 92).
Claim 3. Goudy and Kawamata teach the driving assistance device according to claim 2, wherein the notification signal includes a sound source signal for notifying of positional information of the other vehicle by a sound source device,
(Page 13/14- Further, in the driving support device 2 according to the first to fourth embodiments described above, the sound detected by the traveling sound sensor 32 for the presence / absence of the traffic light 116, the railroad crossing 131, the toll gate 142, and the like, and the presence / absence of other vehicles such as the preceding vehicle 120 are detected. Although the determination is based on information, the presence or absence of these infrastructures and other vehicles may be determined based on information other than sound information.)
and an image signal for giving notification of the positional information of the other vehicle by a display device, wherein,
(Page 18- The presence or absence of infrastructure or other vehicles may be determined based on image information captured by the camera 31 or three-dimensional information detected by the radar sensor 33.).
when the preceding vehicle is located between the self-vehicle and the other vehicle, the arithmetic unit inhibits generation of the sound source signal and generates the image signal
(Page 8- When it is determined that it is not (step ST102, No determination), or when it is determined that the preceding vehicle 120 is present (step ST103, Yes determination), the support device is deactivated (step ST105). That is, the support execution unit 100 is configured not to perform driving support control such as alerting control, braking control, and steering control.).
Claim 5. Goudy and Kawamata teach the driving assistance device according to claim 1, wherein the calculation unit further calculates a travel route of the preceding vehicle based on a result of the communication with the preceding vehicle and further calculates a travel route of the self-vehicle based on information indicating a position, a vehicle speed, and a steering angle of the self-vehicle
([0028] Accordingly, each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following information pertaining to the vehicle issuing the BSM: a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading, vehicle steering wheel angle, vehicle acceleration (e.g., lateral, longitudinal, vertical and yaw rate), vehicle brake status and vehicle size, to name a few. ).
, and when the travel route of the preceding vehicle is different from the travel route of the self-vehicle, the arithmetic unit performs the determination and generates the notification signal based on a result of the determination
([0047] FIG. 7 illustrates Scenario 4 where the host vehicle 10 is intending to travel straight through the intersection and the remote vehicle 14 is travelling in a direction opposite to the host vehicle 10 and intending to turn left through the intersection in a direction which will intersect the travel path of the host vehicle 10. Therefore, a threat of contact exists between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14, and the threat condition is indicated as 1 in Table 5. ).
Claim 6. Goudy teaches a driving assistance method for a vehicle capable of communicating with
another vehicle, the method comprising:
a step of calculating a travel route of the other vehicle based on a result of the communication with the other vehicle;
([0024]-[0026] [0033] the controller 22 is at least programmed to control the vehicle intersection monitoring system 12 in accordance with the flow charts of FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 38 as discussed below...a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) application 100,...basic safety messages (BSM)...each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following...a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading
[0065] FIG. 33 is a diagram illustrating the relationship between the location of the host vehicle 10 and the location of the remote vehicle 14 and the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14...All of the values for the latitude and longitude can be expressed in radians.);
and a step of determining whether the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle traveling on the calculated travel route
([0024]-[0026] [0033] the controller 22 is at least programmed to control the vehicle intersection monitoring system 12 in accordance with the flow charts of FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 38 as discussed below...a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) application 100,...basic safety messages (BSM)...each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following... a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading
[0065] FIG. 33 is a diagram illustrating the relationship between the location of the host vehicle 10 and the location of the remote vehicle 14 and the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14...All of the values for the latitude and longitude can be expressed in radians. ),
and generating a notification signal for notifying that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle when it is determined that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle
([0037] The threat information generated by the threat/notify/warn application 112 can list all of the identified remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and include BSM information from the remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and the types of alerts and warnings attributed to those remote vehicles 14.
[0064]-[0068][ the controller 22 can extract the GPS and BSM information from the data packet to use that information to identify the scenario as discussed above with regard to FIGS. 4 through 30... the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14....In other words, H.sub.threshold represents the threshold value that determines whether the remote vehicle 14 should be considered to be a possible threat vehicle.
[0084]-[0085]Thus, by performing the operations in FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 36, the controller 22 selects an intersection scenario from a plurality of intersection scenarios based on the host vehicle information and the remote vehicle information, and monitors a location relationship between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 according to an algorithm that is determined based on the selected intersection scenario... In the flowchart in FIG. 37, the processing calculates the time to collision (TTC) beginning in step 6000. Thus, the processing determines whether to provide a warning to the host vehicle 10 by evaluating an operating condition of the host vehicle 10 while the possibility of contact exists between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14.
(e.g. arithmetic is being performed by the controller which performs arithmetic in at least Figs. 33, 34 and 36. Collision warning steps are performed (Fig. 37) when it is deemed necessary of a potential collision)).
Goudy further discloses using assisting devices for a vehicle but does not specifically disclose wherein when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self-vehicle, the determination is performed and the generating of the notification signal is deactivated.
However, Kawamata teaches wherein when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self-vehicle, the determination is performed and the generating of the notification signal is deactivated
(Page 8- When it is determined that it is not (step ST102, No determination), or when it is determined that the preceding vehicle 120 is present (step ST103, Yes determination), the support device is deactivated (step ST105). That is, the support execution unit 100 is configured not to perform driving support control such as alerting control, braking control, and steering control.
Page 9- For this reason, even when the vehicle speed becomes low, driving assistance is prohibited when the preceding vehicle 120 is detected within a predetermined distance from the host vehicle 1, and driving assistance is executed only when the preceding vehicle 120 is not detected.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use deactivation of the notification signal as taught by Kawamata within the system of Goudy for the purpose of enhancing the driving assistance device to conserve energy consumption when driving support is not necessary..
Claim 7. Goudy teaches a computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer to execute driving assistance for a vehicle capable of communicating with another vehicle, the program causing the computer to perform:
calculating a travel route of the other vehicle based on a result of the communication with the other vehicle; and determining whether the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle traveling on the calculated travel route
([0024]-[0026] [0033] the controller 22 is at least programmed to control the vehicle intersection monitoring system 12 in accordance with the flow charts of FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 38 as discussed below...a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) application 100,...basic safety messages (BSM)...each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following... a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading
[0065] FIG. 33 is a diagram illustrating the relationship between the location of the host vehicle 10 and the location of the remote vehicle 14 and the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14...All of the values for the latitude and longitude can be expressed in radians.),
and generating a notification signal for notifying that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle when it is determined that the self-vehicle interferes with the other vehicle
([0037] The threat information generated by the threat/notify/warn application 112 can list all of the identified remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and include BSM information from the remote vehicles 14 that are threat vehicles and the types of alerts and warnings attributed to those remote vehicles 14.
[0064]-[0068][ the controller 22 can extract the GPS and BSM information from the data packet to use that information to identify the scenario as discussed above with regard to FIGS. 4 through 30... the manner in which a point of contact of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 can be calculated based on the respective speed and heading of the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14....In other words, H.sub.threshold represents the threshold value that determines whether the remote vehicle 14 should be considered to be a possible threat vehicle.
[0084]-[0085]Thus, by performing the operations in FIGS. 31, 32 and 34 through 36, the controller 22 selects an intersection scenario from a plurality of intersection scenarios based on the host vehicle information and the remote vehicle information, and monitors a location relationship between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14 according to an algorithm that is determined based on the selected intersection scenario... In the flowchart in FIG. 37, the processing calculates the time to collision (TTC) beginning in step 6000. Thus, the processing determines whether to provide a warning to the host vehicle 10 by evaluating an operating condition of the host vehicle 10 while the possibility of contact exists between the host vehicle 10 and the remote vehicle 14.
(e.g. arithmetic is being performed by the controller which performs arithmetic in at least Figs. 33, 34 and 36. Collision warning steps are performed (Fig. 37) when it is deemed necessary of a potential collision)),.
Goudy further discloses using assisting devices for a vehicle but does not specifically disclose wherein, when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self- vehicle, the determination is performed and the generating of the notification signal is deactivated.
However, Kawamata teaches wherein, when a preceding vehicle traveling in a direction equivalent to a direction of the self-vehicle is within a range of a predetermined distance from the self- vehicle, the determination is performed and the generating of the notification signal is deactivated
(Page 8- When it is determined that it is not (step ST102, No determination), or when it is determined that the preceding vehicle 120 is present (step ST103, Yes determination), the support device is deactivated (step ST105). That is, the support execution unit 100 is configured not to perform driving support control such as alerting control, braking control, and steering control.
Page 9- For this reason, even when the vehicle speed becomes low, driving assistance is prohibited when the preceding vehicle 120 is detected within a predetermined distance from the host vehicle 1, and driving assistance is executed only when the preceding vehicle 120 is not detected.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use deactivation of the notification signal as taught by Kawamata within the system of Goudy for the purpose of enhancing the driving assistance device to conserve energy consumption when driving support is not necessary..
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goudy and Kawamata and further in view of Konhauser (US 20070265760 A1).
Claim 4. Goudy and Kawamata teach the driving assistance device according to claim 1, wherein
the calculation unit further calculates a travel route of the self-vehicle based on information indicating a position, a vehicle speed, and a steering angle of the self-vehicle
([0028] Accordingly, each BSM either transmitted by the host vehicle 10 or transmitted by a remote vehicle 14 can include the following information pertaining to the vehicle issuing the BSM: a temporary vehicle ID, vehicle latitude, vehicle longitude, vehicle elevation, position accuracy, vehicle speed, vehicle heading, vehicle steering wheel angle, vehicle acceleration (e.g., lateral, longitudinal, vertical and yaw rate), vehicle brake status and vehicle size, to name a few. ).
Goudy and Kawamata further discloses the detection or absence of a preceding vehicle but do not specifically disclose when the preceding vehicle is located at a reference distance or more from the travel route of the self-vehicle, the arithmetic unit performs the determination and generates the notification signal based on a result of the determination.
However, Konhauser teaches when the preceding vehicle is located at a reference distance or more from the travel route of the self-vehicle, the arithmetic unit performs the determination and generates the notification signal based on a result of the determination.
([0031] The driving assistance apparatus 19 accordingly evaluates position details 58, which are contained in the danger alarm 54 and indicate the position of the danger point 50. The driving assistance apparatus 19, for example the receiver means 25, compares the position details 58 with position data which defines the current position of the vehicle 10, and which is received by the driving assistance apparatus 19 from a position sensor 36, for example a GPS (global positioning system) receiver. In the present scenario, the danger alarm 54 is relevant because the vehicle 10 is within a predetermined distance of the danger point 50.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use a reference distance as taught by Konhauser within the system of Goudy for the purpose of enhancing the device to enable and detect other incidents surrounding the vehicle prior to approaching the preceding vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of Yamazaki (US 20220297687 A1) teaches a calculation unit and driving support unit which turns on after detecting and predicting movement of a preceding vehicle (See [0082]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUFUS C POINT whose telephone number is (571)270-7510. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/RUFUS C POINT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689