CTFR 18/919,979 CTFR 100411 Hi DETAILED ACTION This is a response to Applicant’s submissions filed on 4/23/2026. Claims 1, 3-11 and 13-20 are pending. 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. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. It is noted that the amendments to the claims have overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112. In response to Applicant’s argument that Meuleau discloses setting spacing based on roadway geometry, not based on state information of the vehicle (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 16), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted by Applicant, Meuleau discloses setting the spacing between the layers based on the roadway geometry at a particular location. Meuleau further discloses, in column 5, lines 9-23, that the layers are positioned from a current position of the vehicle to a desired future position of the vehicle. Therefore, Meuleau’s spacing is based on the location of the vehicle. Paragraph 46 of Applicant’s specification discloses variable state information of the vehicle includes position. It is further noted that Iwai is relied upon to disclose the variable state information. See rejection below. In response to Applicant’s argument that Meuleau does not disclose the fixed state information comprises length information of the vehicle and maximum steering angle information of the vehicle (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 16), it is noted that Meuleau is not relied upon to disclose the fixed state information. It is the combination of Iwai with Funke that is relied upon to disclose the fixed state information. See rejection below. In response to Applicant’s argument that Funke does not use the vehicle’s wheelbase information to set azimuth conditions or separation distance conditions (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 16), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraph 45 of Applicant’s specification discloses azimuth describes an angular measurement of a direction on a horizontal plane. Paragraphs 53-57 appear to disclose the azimuth conditions are angles between a point on the vehicle and a point the vehicle can reach by traveling a specific distance, i.e., a trajectory, and the azimuth angles are limited to an angular range that the vehicle can physically reach, based on its wheelbase. Funke, in paragraphs 11-12, discloses generating trajectories for vehicles that take into account steering limits determined using vehicle specifications such as wheelbase. It is further noted that there does not appear to be disclosure of using the wheelbase information to set the separation distance conditions. See rejection below . Drawings The amendments to the specification have resolved the previous objections to the drawings, therefore, the drawings submitted 10/18/2024 are acceptable. Specification The amendments to the specification were received on 4/23/2026. The objections of record have been withdrawn. 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 3, 5, 9-11, 13, 15 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwai et al. (US 2023/0219567), hereinafter Iwai, in view of Meuleau (US 9,405,293) and Funke et al. (US 2023/0192127), hereinafter Funke . Regarding claims 1 and 11 , Iwai discloses an apparatus of a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: one or more processors (Iwai; fig. 2: processor 110); and memory storing instructions (Iwai; para. 62: vehicle control program 130 is stored in the storage device 120), when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: generate, based on state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 96: the control device 100 sets an imaginary arc A lying ahead of the vehicle 1. More specifically, the arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1), a plurality of first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 96: A plurality of path candidate points C is temporarily set on this arc A.), wherein the plurality of first candidate sample points satisfy a plurality of first azimuth conditions (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.) and a first separation distance condition (Iwai; para. 96: arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1 in a radial direction); based on an optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 99: term H1 on the right side of Formula (1) represents the risk value Urisk at the path candidate), information related to a goal point (Iwai; para. 98: Lgoal is a distance from the evaluation point E to the destination), and information related to the plurality of first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 calculates the first evaluation value Jsemi for each path candidate), select a first optimal sample point from the plurality of first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest), wherein the first optimal sample point satisfies the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest); generate, based on the first optimal sample point, a plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C. The sub-global path PS is represented by a set of a plurality of path candidate points C that is arrayed at regular intervals Lgl_p), wherein the plurality of second candidate sample points satisfy a plurality of second azimuth conditions (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.) and a second separation distance condition (Iwai; para. 96: arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1 in a radial direction), set based on updated state information, and wherein the updated state information is obtained by updating, based on the first optimal sample point, the state information of the moving object (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.); based on the optimal sample point condition, the information related to the goal point, and information related to the plurality of second candidate sample points, select a second optimal sample point from the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest), wherein the second optimal sample point satisfies the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest); generate, based on the first optimal sample point and the second optimal sample point, a driving route (Iwai; para. 100: sub-global path PS is represented by a set of a plurality of path candidate points C that is arrayed at regular intervals Lgl_p); and control, based on the driving route, the vehicle for autonomous driving (Iwai; para. 51: a target path PT for reaching the destination is calculated in real time, and the vehicle 1 is controlled so as to follow this target path PT), wherein the state information of the vehicle comprises variable state information, wherein the variable state information comprises location information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 96: the control device 100 sets an imaginary arc A lying ahead of the vehicle 1. More specifically, the arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the [current] position of the vehicle 1) and heading information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 67: States of the vehicle 1 include … a yaw rate, a steering angle, etc.). Iwai does not explicitly disclose the plurality of first azimuth conditions are set based on the state information of the moving vehicle; and the plurality of second azimuth conditions are set based on the updated state information. Meuleau, in the same field of endeavor (autonomous vehicle navigation), discloses a plurality of azimuth conditions are repeatedly set based on state information of a moving object (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 24-30: The distances between successive pairs of layers 240a-240f can be constant or non-constant. As one example, the spacing between layers 240a-240f can decrease in proportion to the curvature of the roadway 200 at a particular location such that the spacing between layers 240a-240f is smaller within curves than on straight sections.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the arc angle and interval between adjacent path candidate points of Iwai to span the width of the road the vehicle travels, as disclosed by Meuleau, to yield the predictable result of restricting candidate locations to locations that are on the road. Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose the first separation distance condition is set based on the state information of the moving object; and the second separation distance condition is set based on the updated state information. Meuleau further discloses a separation distance condition is repeatedly set based on state information of a moving object (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 31-39: trajectory planning system 140 can model each of the layers 240a-240f of the roadway 200 as having a plurality of nodes 300 that are spaced from one another transversely with respect to the roadway 200 within a width of each layer (sometimes referred to herein as a first width). In particular, each of the layers 240a-240f has a width that extends transverse the roadway (e.g. generally perpendicular to the central track 210 at the respective location of each of the layers). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the arc radius of Iwai, as modified, to be smaller within curves than on straight sections, as disclosed by Meuleau, to yield the predictable result of reducing the amount of processing performed on sections of road that require less direction changes. Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose the state information comprises fixed state information, wherein the fixed state information comprises length information of the vehicle and maximum steering angle information of the vehicle. Funke, in the same field of endeavor (autonomous vehicle navigation), discloses state information of a vehicle comprises fixed state information, wherein the fixed state information comprises length information of the vehicle (Funke; para. 11: steering limits may be determined using kinematic and/or dynamic models of the vehicle, taking into account vehicle specifications such as wheelbase) and maximum steering angle information of the vehicle (Funke; para. 11: the remote system may provide steering limit data, such as steering angle limits and steering rate limits, to an autonomous vehicle as a table or other data structure including discrete and discontinuous steering limit values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have limited the arc angle of Iwai, as modified, to be within a range of steering limits based on the motion and specifications of the vehicle, as disclosed by Funke, with the motivation of determining optimized trajectories holistically, by considering vehicle-specific and state-specific steering limits in combination with other vehicle safety and operational considerations thereby improving overall driving efficiency and vehicle safety (Funke; para. 19). Regarding claims 3 and 13 , Iwai, as modified, discloses generating the plurality of first candidate sample points comprises setting the plurality of first azimuth conditions with reference to turning radius information (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.), wherein the turning radius information is determined based on the fixed state information and the variable state information (Funke; para. 11: steering limits may be determined using kinematic and/or dynamic models of the vehicle, taking into account vehicle specifications such as wheelbase), and wherein the generating the plurality of second candidate sample points comprises setting the plurality of second azimuth conditions with reference to the turning radius information (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.). Regarding claims 5 and 15 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting the first optimal sample point comprises selecting, based on a first free space region condition, the first optimal sample point (Iwai; para. 95: control device 100 recognizes risks (e.g., obstacles) in the sensor detection range RNG_S and calculates the risk potentials in real time), wherein the first free space region condition is determined by using the state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 95: The risk potential represents the risk value Urisk as a function of position.), and wherein the first optimal sample point satisfies the first free space region condition (Iwai; para. 99: The first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smaller as the risk value Urisk at the path candidate becomes smaller.; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest; para. 101: a sub-global path PS for moving to the destination while avoiding risks around the vehicle 1 is obtained), and wherein the selecting the second optimal sample point comprises performing one of selecting, based on a second free space region condition, the second optimal sample point from the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest … on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C), wherein the second free space region condition is determined by using the state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 95: The risk potential represents the risk value Urisk as a function of position.), and wherein the second optimal sample point satisfies the second free space region condition (Iwai; para. 99: The first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smaller as the risk value Urisk at the path candidate becomes smaller.; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest; para. 101: a sub-global path PS for moving to the destination while avoiding risks around the vehicle 1 is obtained); or selecting a new first optimal sample point from the plurality of the first candidate sample points. Regarding claims 9 and 19 , Iwai, as modified, discloses the plurality of first azimuth conditions comprise at least one of -14°, -10°, -7°, -5°, 0° (Iwai; fig. 7: one of the control points C is located on a 0° heading relative to the vehicle), 5°, 7°, 10°, or 14°. Regarding claims 10 and 20 , Iwai, as modified, discloses the first separation distance condition comprises a predetermined driving distance (Iwai; para. 86: sub-global path PS is represented by a set of a plurality of path candidate points (transit points) C arrayed at regular intervals. Thus, the sub-global path PS is formed by connecting a plurality of path candidate points (transit points) C arrayed at regular intervals) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 4, 7-8, 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwai in view of Meuleau as applied to claim s 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Giovannini et al. (US 8,825,366), hereinafter Giovannini . Regarding claims 4 and 14 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting the first optimal sample point comprises based on first heading information at each of the plurality of first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.), assigning a first score to each of the plurality of first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 calculates the first evaluation value Jsemi for each path candidate); and selecting, based on the first score assigned to each of the plurality of first candidate sample points, the first optimal sample point (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest … on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C), and wherein the selecting the second optimal sample point comprises based on second heading information at each of the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.), assigning a second score to each of the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 calculates the first evaluation value Jsemi for each path candidate); and selecting, based on the second score assigned to each of the plurality of second candidate sample points, the second optimal sample point (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest). Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose assigning the score to each of the plurality of first and second candidate sample points based on first directional information from the plurality of first and second candidate sample points to the goal point. Giovannini, in the same field of endeavor (vehicle navigation), discloses repeatedly assigning a score to each of a plurality of candidate sample points based on first directional information from the plurality of candidate sample points to a goal point (Giovannini; col. 4, ll. 1-15: for evaluating a section of trajectory … the difference of heading is determined between the heading at said downstream end and a target heading at said target point; and a score is attributed to said section of trajectory, as a function of said distance and of said difference of heading. This score illustrates the ability of the section of trajectory to meet the set objective, that is to allow the aircraft if it follows this section of trajectory to rapidly reach said target point while having then a heading close to the target heading). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the calculation of the evaluation value Jsemi for each path candidate point of Iwai, as modified, to include the difference in heading between each point and a desired heading at the destination, with the motivation of allowing the vehicle to rapidly reach a destination while having then a heading close to a target heading (Giovannini; col. 4; ll. 13-15). Regarding claims 7 and 17 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting the second optimal sample point comprises performing one of: based on at least one of the plurality of second candidate sample points being located within a region (Iwai; para. 98: Lgoal is a distance from the evaluation point E to the destination and calculated based on the map information 230.), selecting the second optimal sample point from the plurality of second candidate sample points, wherein the region is set based on a location of the goal point (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest). Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose a heading difference value satisfying a threshold range and wherein the heading difference value is based on a difference between first heading information at at least one of the plurality of second candidate sample points and second heading information at the goal point; or based on the heading difference value not satisfying the threshold range, selecting a new first optimal sample point from the plurality of first candidate sample points. Giovannini discloses selecting a point based on a heading difference value satisfying a threshold range and wherein the heading difference value is based on a difference between first heading information at at least one of a plurality of candidate sample points and heading information at a goal point (Giovannini; col. 4, ll. 1-22: for evaluating a section of trajectory … the difference of heading is determined between the heading at said downstream end and a target heading at said target point; and a score is attributed to said section of trajectory, as a function of said distance and of said difference of heading. This score illustrates the ability of the section of trajectory to meet the set objective, that is to allow the aircraft if it follows this section of trajectory to rapidly reach said target point while having then a heading close to the target heading … all the successive headings are taken into consideration, according to a predetermined pitch, from the current heading at the downstream end, for instance 10.degree., up to a maximum heading (for instance 170.degree. from the current heading), and this on either side of said current heading). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the calculation of the evaluation value Jsemi for each path candidate point of Iwai, as modified, to include the difference in heading between each point and a desired heading at the destination, with the motivation of allowing the vehicle to rapidly reach a destination while having then a heading close to a target heading (Giovannini; col. 4; ll. 13-15). Regarding claim 8 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting the new first optimal sample point comprises: selecting a new first optimal sample point from the plurality of first candidate sample points, wherein the new first optimal sample point satisfies the optimal sample point condition, and wherein the new first optimal sample point is different from the first optimal sample point (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest); generating a second plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C. The sub-global path PS is represented by a set of a plurality of path candidate points C that is arrayed at regular intervals Lgl_p), wherein the second plurality of second candidate sample points satisfy a plurality of third azimuth conditions (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.) and a third separation distance condition (Iwai; para. 96: arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1 in a radial direction), wherein the plurality of third azimuth conditions (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 24-30: The distances between successive pairs of layers 240a-240f can be constant or non-constant. As one example, the spacing between layers 240a-240f can decrease in proportion to the curvature of the roadway 200 at a particular location such that the spacing between layers 240a-240f is smaller within curves than on straight sections.) and the third separation distance condition are set based on second updated state information (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 31-39: trajectory planning system 140 can model each of the layers 240a-240f of the roadway 200 as having a plurality of nodes 300 that are spaced from one another transversely with respect to the roadway 200 within a width of each layer (sometimes referred to herein as a first width). In particular, each of the layers 240a-240f has a width that extends transverse the roadway (e.g. generally perpendicular to the central track 210 at the respective location of each of the layers), and wherein the second updated state information is obtained by updating, based on the new first optimal sample point, the state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.); and based on the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 99: term H1 on the right side of Formula (1) represents the risk value Urisk at the path candidate), at least one of the second plurality of second candidate sample points being located within the region (Iwai; para. 98: Lgoal is a distance from the evaluation point E to the destination and calculated based on the map information 230.), and a new heading difference value satisfying the threshold range, wherein the new heading difference value is based on a difference between new first heading information at at least one of the second plurality of second candidate sample points and the second heading information at the goal point (Giovannini; col. 4, ll. 1-22: for evaluating a section of trajectory … the difference of heading is determined between the heading at said downstream end and a target heading at said target point; and a score is attributed to said section of trajectory, as a function of said distance and of said difference of heading. This score illustrates the ability of the section of trajectory to meet the set objective, that is to allow the aircraft if it follows this section of trajectory to rapidly reach said target point while having then a heading close to the target heading … all the successive headings are taken into consideration, according to a predetermined pitch, from the current heading at the downstream end, for instance 10.degree., up to a maximum heading (for instance 170.degree. from the current heading), and this on either side of said current heading), selecting a new second optimal sample point from the second plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwai in view of Meuleau as applied to claim s 5 and 15 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (US 2021/0020045), hereinafter Huang . Regarding claims 6 and 16 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting a first optimal sample point from the plurality of the first candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest), wherein the first optimal sample point satisfies the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest) and the first free space region condition (Iwai; para. 99: The first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smaller as the risk value Urisk at the path candidate becomes smaller.; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest; para. 101: a sub-global path PS for moving to the destination while avoiding risks around the vehicle 1 is obtained); generating a plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.), wherein the plurality of second candidate sample points satisfy a plurality of third azimuth conditions (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.) and a third separation distance condition (Iwai; para. 96: arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1 in a radial direction), wherein the plurality of third azimuth conditions (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 24-30: The distances between successive pairs of layers 240a-240f can be constant or non-constant. As one example, the spacing between layers 240a-240f can decrease in proportion to the curvature of the roadway 200 at a particular location such that the spacing between layers 240a-240f is smaller within curves than on straight sections.) and the third separation distance condition are set based on second updated state information (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 31-39: trajectory planning system 140 can model each of the layers 240a-240f of the roadway 200 as having a plurality of nodes 300 that are spaced from one another transversely with respect to the roadway 200 within a width of each layer (sometimes referred to herein as a first width). In particular, each of the layers 240a-240f has a width that extends transverse the roadway (e.g. generally perpendicular to the central track 210 at the respective location of each of the layers), and wherein the second updated state information is obtained by updating, based on the first optimal sample point, the state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.); and based on the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 99: term H1 on the right side of Formula (1) represents the risk value Urisk at the path candidate), the information related to the goal point (Iwai; para. 98: Lgoal is a distance from the evaluation point E to the destination), information related to the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 96: A plurality of path candidate points C is temporarily set on this arc A.), and the second free space region condition (Iwai; para. 99: The first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smaller as the risk value Urisk at the path candidate becomes smaller.; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest; para. 101: a sub-global path PS for moving to the destination while avoiding risks around the vehicle 1 is obtained), selecting a second optimal sample point from the plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 searches for and selects such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest). Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose based on none of the plurality of second candidate sample points satisfying the second free space region condition, selecting a new first optimal sample point from the plurality of the first candidate sample points. Huang, in the same field of endeavor (autonomous vehicle navigation), discloses based on none of a plurality of second candidate sample points satisfying a free space region condition, selecting a new first optimal sample point from a plurality of first candidate sample points (Huang; para. 88: process 400 may comprise determining whether there is a motion primitive of the set of motion primitives that is collision-free and connects the first node to the second node, according to any of the techniques discussed herein. If no such motion primitive is found, the search … may comprise back-tracking, which may comprise removing the previous connection 406 and determining a new previous connection and attempting to determine a new next connection). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the search for and selection of the next path candidate point C of Iwai, as modified, when all of the potential paths will result in a collision, to backtrack and search from a different previous point, as disclosed by Huang, to yield the predictable result of identifying a route around an obstacle . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwai in view of Meuleau and Giovannini as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Huang . Regarding claim 18 , Iwai, as modified, discloses selecting a first optimal sample point from the plurality of first candidate sample points, wherein the first optimal sample point satisfies the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 100: control device 100 selects a path candidate for which the first evaluation value Jsemi is smallest, i.e., such a path candidate point C that the first evaluation value Jsemi becomes smallest); generating a plurality of second candidate sample points (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C. The sub-global path PS is represented by a set of a plurality of path candidate points C that is arrayed at regular intervals Lgl_p), wherein the plurality of second candidate sample points satisfy a plurality of third azimuth conditions (Iwai; para. 96: An interval between adjacent path candidate points C on the arc A is an angle Δθview.) and a third separation distance condition (Iwai; para. 96: arc A is a predetermined distance Lgl_p away from the position of the vehicle 1 in a radial direction), wherein the plurality of third azimuth conditions (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 24-30: The distances between successive pairs of layers 240a-240f can be constant or non-constant. As one example, the spacing between layers 240a-240f can decrease in proportion to the curvature of the roadway 200 at a particular location such that the spacing between layers 240a-240f is smaller within curves than on straight sections.) and the third separation distance condition are set based on second updated state information (Meuleau; col. 5, ll. 31-39: trajectory planning system 140 can model each of the layers 240a-240f of the roadway 200 as having a plurality of nodes 300 that are spaced from one another transversely with respect to the roadway 200 within a width of each layer (sometimes referred to herein as a first width). In particular, each of the layers 240a-240f has a width that extends transverse the roadway (e.g. generally perpendicular to the central track 210 at the respective location of each of the layers), and wherein the second updated state information is obtained by updating, based on the first optimal sample point, the state information of the vehicle (Iwai; para. 100: on the assumption that the vehicle 1 has moved to the selected path candidate point C, the control device 100 may search for and select the next path candidate point C.); and based on the optimal sample point condition (Iwai; para. 99: term H1 on the right side of Formula (1) represents the risk value Urisk at the path candidate), at least one of the second plurality of second candidate sample points being located within the region (Iwai; para. 98: Lgoal is a distance from the evaluation point E to the destination and calculated based on the map information 230.), and a heading difference value satisfying the threshold range, wherein the heading difference value is based on a difference between first heading information at at least one of the plurality of second candidate sample points and the second heading information at the goal point (Giovannini; col. 4, ll. 1-22: for evaluating a section of trajectory … the difference of heading is determined between the heading at said downstream end and a target heading at said target point; and a score is attributed to said section of trajectory, as a function of said distance and of said difference of heading. This score illustrates the ability of the section of trajectory to meet the set objective, that is to allow the aircraft if it follows this section of trajectory to rapidly reach said target point while having then a heading close to the target heading … all the successive headings are taken into consideration, according to a predetermined pitch, from the current heading at the downstream end, for instance 10.degree., up to a maximum heading (for instance 170.degree. from the current heading), and this on either side of said current heading), selecting a new second optimal sample point from the second plurality of second candidate sample points. Iwai, as modified, does not explicitly disclose selecting a new first optimal sample point based on the heading difference value not satisfying the threshold range, wherein the first optimal sample point is different from the first optimal sample point. Huang discloses selecting a new optimal sample point based on a heading difference value not satisfying a threshold range, wherein the new optimal sample point is different from the optimal sample point (Huang; para. 88: If no such motion primitive is found, the search … may comprise back-tracking, which may comprise removing the previous connection 406 and determining a new previous connection and attempting to determine a new next connection). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified, when there is not a potential path within the maximum heading, the search for and selection of the next path candidate point C of Iwai, as modified, to backtrack and search from a different previous point, as disclosed by Huang, to yield the predictable result of identifying a route to the destination. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00AM-3:00PM 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. /JOSEPH THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /AMELIA VORCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 2 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 3 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 4 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 5 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 6 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 7 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 8 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 9 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 10 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 11 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 12 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 13 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 14 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 15 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 16 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 17 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 18 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 19 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 20 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 21 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 22 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 23 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 24 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 18/919,979 Page 25 Art Unit: 3665
Prosecution Insights