Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/905,849

Robust Method for Detecting Traffic Signals and Their Associated States

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 03, 2024
Examiner
WHALEN, MICHAEL F
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Waymo LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
251 granted / 396 resolved
+11.4% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
409
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
14.5%
-25.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 396 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/03/2024 and 11/19/2025 are being considered by the examiner. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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. Claims 1, 6-8, 10-12, 14-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2012/0221207 (Nakamura) in view of US 2012/0288138 (Zeng). With respect to claims 1, 11, and 20 Nakamura teaches/discloses: A method/system of controlling a vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and ¶0034), the method comprising: a plurality of sensors couple to the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 9; #300 and #400-415; and ¶0034 and ¶0096-103); a computing system coupled to the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and ¶0034), wherein the computing system is configured to: monitoring, by a computing system and using first sensor data from one or more sensors coupled to the vehicle (see at least Fig 1; #300; and ¶0038; Discussing a vehicle system that has sensors.), a first target area located relative to the vehicle traveling in an environment (see at least Fig 1, 10, and 12(A-D); #200, #300, and S001-S002; and ¶0107 and ¶0133-141; Discussing setting the processing area as a normal area, when the vehicle is traveling in the leftmost or rightmost lane.); detecting a change corresponding to the environment or the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 6; #200 and #222; and ¶0084); responsive to detecting the change (see at least Fig 10 and 12(A-D); S003-S005; and ¶0111-116 and ¶0133-141; Discussing detecting the number of lanes, and lane that the vehicle is traveling in.), monitoring a second target area located relative to the vehicle using second sensor data from the one or more sensors (see at least Fig 10, 12(A-D), and 13; S006; and ¶0116-117 and ¶0133-143; Discussing expanding the sensor area depending on the number of lanes or missing information.), wherein the first target area and the second target area differ in size or shape (see at least Fig 10, 12 (A-D, and 13); S006; and ¶0116-117 and ¶0133-143; Discussing expanding the sensor area.); and Nakamura does not go into detail on how the sensor data is used and therefore does not specifically teach: controlling the vehicle based on monitoring the second target area. However Zeng teaches: controlling the vehicle based on monitoring the second target area (see at least Fig 3; #340; and ¶0038-39 and ¶0047). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method for controlling the sensor area of a vehicle system disclosed in Nakamura with a system for controlling the vehicle based on the sensed information as taught in Zeng with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the vehicle to automatically respond to a situation (see Zeng ¶0039). Thus making the vehicle safer. With respect to claims 6 and 16 Nakamura teaches: wherein detecting the change in condition corresponding to the environment or the vehicle comprises: detecting a change in speed of the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 17; #400, #411, and S303; and ¶0039-42 and ¶0199-202); and modifying a width of the first target area to form the second target area based on detecting the change in speed of the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 17; #400, #411, and S303-305; and ¶0039-42 and ¶0199-202; Discussing expanding the sensor range based on vehicle speed). With respect to claims 7 and 17 Nakamura teaches: wherein detecting the change in condition corresponding to the environment or the vehicle comprises: determining the vehicle is approaching a turn (see at least Fig 1 and 16; #200, #222, S207, and S209; and ¶0178-186); and expanding the first target area to form the second target area for use during performance of the turn by the vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 16; #200, #222, and S207-210; and ¶0178-186; Discussing expanding the sensor range if the vehicle is turning.). With respect to claims 8 and 18 Nakamura does not specifically teach: identifying a traffic signal in an output generated by monitoring the second target area using the one or more sensors; and controlling the vehicle based on a state of the traffic signal. However Zeng teaches: identifying a traffic signal in an output generated by monitoring the second target area using the one or more sensors (see at least Fig 3; #320; and ¶0031-33 and ¶0047; and controlling the vehicle based on a state of the traffic signal (see at least Fig 3; #340; and ¶0038-39). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method for controlling the sensor area of a vehicle system disclosed in Nakamura with a system for controlling the vehicle based on the sensed information as taught in Zeng with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the vehicle to automatically respond to a situation (see Zeng ¶0039). Thus making the vehicle safer. With respect to claim 10 Nakamura teaches: wherein detecting the change in condition corresponding to the environment or the vehicle comprises: detecting a change in speed or orientation of a given vehicle in the environment (see at least Fig 1 and 17; #400, #411, and S303; and ¶0039-42 and ¶0199-202); and switching from monitoring the first target area to monitoring the second target area based on detecting the change in speed or orientation of the given vehicle (see at least Fig 1 and 17; 200, #211, #400, #411, and S207-210, S303-305; and ¶0039-42. ¶0178-186, and ¶0199-202; Discussing changing the area monitored based speed/orientation). With respect to claim 12 Nakamura teaches: wherein the plurality of sensors includes a global positioning system (GPS) receiver and a camera (see at least Fig 1 and 2; #7 and #300; and ¶0038 and ¶0041-42). With respect to claim 14 Nakamura teaches: determine the vehicle is approaching an intersection (see at least Fig 16; S202; and ¶0168-169); and expand the first target area to form the second target area for use during navigation of the intersection by the vehicle (see at least Fig 16; S208 and S210; and ¶180-192). With respect to claim 15 Nakamura teaches: determine the vehicle is approaching the intersection based on map data or an output generated by scanning the target area using the one or more sensors (see at least Fig 3 and 16; #150, #222, and S201-202; and ¶0049-50 and ¶0167-170) Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5, 9, 13, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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 MICHAEL F WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7747. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6. 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, Peter Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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. MICHAEL F. WHALEN Examiner Art Unit 3661 /M.F.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3661 /PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585291
INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586467
CONNECTED-VEHICLE INTERFACE MODULE AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570270
HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLE AND DRIVE CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567874
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR IDENTIFYING VEHICLE THROUGH DATA AND WIRELESS SIGNAL ANALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12566459
AUTOMATED CARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+19.8%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 396 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month