CTNF 18/904,324 CTNF 88366 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the classified point clouds." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 recites the limitation " the travel environment point cloud update means." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 inherits the same deficiencies as claim 5 upon which it depends. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hou et al., US 2022/0113159 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Hou”) . Regarding claim 1 , Hou discloses a point cloud processing system comprising: at least one memory storing computer-executable instructions; and at least one processor configured to access the at least one memory and execute the computer-executable instructions to (see Hou Figs. 1 and 10, and paras. 0073-0078, where the computer system comprises processor(s) and memory for executing computer program instructions) : acquire sensing information including a sensing point cloud generated by sensing means, which is mounted on a moving body traveling on any one of a plurality of travel tracks extending in parallel to one another, for sensing an area ahead in a heading direction of the moving body (see Hou Figs. 1-5, and paras. 0033-0035, where point clouds are captured for the parallel streets and/or parallel lanes ahead of the traveling vehicle, i.e. via a LiDAR detection system mounted on top of a vehicle that moves throughout the environment and/or city) , and track identification information identifying a travel track on which the moving body travels while performing sensing (see Hou Figs. 1-9, and paras. 0002, 0032, 0033, 0042, 0048, 0056, 0060, and 0070, where Google Maps is used, but also road graphs and/or maps are constructed and eventually locked) ; and register the sensing point cloud with respect to a travel track point cloud associated with the travel track on which the moving body travels while performing sensing, among a travel environment point cloud being a known point cloud of a travel environment including the plurality of travel tracks (see Hou Figs. 4A and 4B, and paras. 0033, 0037, 0038, and 0057-0059, where the new point cloud is used to update a previous point cloud, graph, and map) . Claims 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under the same analysis as claim 1 above. Regarding claim 2 , Hou discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to register the sensing point cloud with respect to the travel environment point cloud by using a registration result acquired by registering the sensing point cloud with respect to the travel track point cloud as an initial condition (see Hou Figs. 1-5, and paras. 0033, 0037, 0038, 0046-0048, and 0057-0059, where point clouds are registered and/or aligned as an initial condition before those registered, aligned, and overlapping point clouds are grouped into low level nodes, and then those aligned and overlapping low level nodes are further grouped into high level nodes) . Regarding claim 3 , Hou discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to update the travel environment point cloud, based on the sensing point cloud and a registration result acquired by registering the sensing point cloud with respect to the travel environment point cloud (see Hou para. 0056, where registration and alignment is used to determine if the new point cloud is sufficiently different than the prior point cloud to warrant an update of the prior point cloud) . Regarding claim 4 , Hou discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to classify the travel environment point cloud into a plurality of travel track point clouds and store the classified point clouds (see Hou Figs. 1-5, and paras. 0046-0048 and 0074, where point clouds are classified and aggregated into low level nodes, and then those low level nodes are further classified and aggregated into high level nodes representing road and/or lane segments of a road map; and also “[t]he computer system 1000 also includes a main memory 1006 , such as a random access memory (RAM), cache and/or other dynamic storage devices, coupled to bus 1002 for storing information and instructions to be executed by processor(s) 1004 ”) . Regarding claim 7 , Hou discloses wherein the moving body is an automobile or a train (see Hou Fig. 1, and para. 0033, illustrating an automobile vehicle) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hou as applied to claim 3 above, and in further view of Wappler et al., US 2025/0012598 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Wappler”) . Regarding claim 5 , Hou does not explicitly disclose the point cloud processing system being provided in an information processing apparatus arranged in the travel environment, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the information processing apparatus to acquire, from the moving body when the moving body reaches the information processing apparatus, the sensing point cloud of a section in which the moving body has traveled, and provide the moving body with assistance information based on the travel environment point cloud updated by the travel environment point cloud update means. However, Wappler discloses the point cloud processing system (see Wappler paras. 0015 and 0040, where “lidar scan data” is collected) being provided in an information processing apparatus arranged in the travel environment (see Wappler para. 0009, where a wireless connection, such as a WLAN connection, is used by the server to communicate with the vehicle, such that it is understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art that the server is part of a wireless local area network (WLAN)) , wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the information processing apparatus to acquire, from the moving body when the moving body reaches the information processing apparatus, the sensing point cloud of a section in which the moving body has traveled, and provide the moving body with assistance information based on the travel environment point cloud updated by the travel environment point cloud update means (see Wappler paras. 0009, 0016-0018, 0033, 0037, 0040, and 0063-0066, where the server collects lidar data via the WLAN connection, updates the map, and then instructs a fleet vehicle to collect additional lidar data in subareas still to be mapped or to be mapped next; and an example of a parking garage is used where the server is reached after the vehicle leaves the parking garage to establish the wireless connection) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the strategic map building and planning technique of Wappler to help build the road maps of Hou, because it is predictable that doing so would improve the efficiency and reliability of Hou’s road map building by ensuring that vehicles go directly to the regions where data is most needed (see Wappler paras. 0005 and 0027, where “. . . the method may be applied particularly efficiently not only by preventing redundant surroundings data from being collected and transmitted, but also by preventing corresponding additional hardware expenditure”) . Regarding claim 6 , Hou does not explicitly disclose wherein the assistance information is associated with a section in which the moving body is to travel. However, Wappler discloses wherein the assistance information is associated with a section in which the moving body is to travel (see Wappler paras. 0009, 0016-0018, 0033, 0037, 0040, and 0063-0066, where the server collects lidar data via the WLAN connection, updates the map, and then instructs a fleet vehicle to collect additional lidar data in subareas still to be mapped or to be mapped next) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang, Zhangyu, et al. "FarNet: An Attention-Aggregation Network for Long-Range Rail Track Point Cloud Segmentation." IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 23.8 (2022): 13118-13126, discloses using a similar point cloud mapping technology of railway via a LiDAR system mounted on trains (see Wang Fig. 8) . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW M MOYER whose telephone number is (571)272-9523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST. 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. 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. /ANDREW M MOYER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 2 Art Unit: 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 3 Art Unit: 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 4 Art Unit: 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 5 Art Unit: 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 6 Art Unit: 2675 Application/Control Number: 18/904,324 Page 7 Art Unit: 2675
Prosecution Insights