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 .
Priority
The applicant’s claim to priority of KR10-2024-0074535 on 6/7/24 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The applicant filed an IDS on 10/24/24. It has been annotated and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3-4 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.
Regarding claim 3 (and similarly 4), the limitation “extracting the first actual driving data associated with the region of interest from the second actual driving data, wherein the plurality of areas is included in the region of interest” is unclear. It is not clear how first actual driving data is extracted from the second actual driving data. The claim discusses the first zone being in the second zone, but does not clarify the relationship between the first actual data and the second actual data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1, 7-8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhu et al. (US Patent 9495874 hereinafter Zhu).
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly 10 and 11) , Zhu teaches a method performed by at least one processor (See at least: Fig. 1 item 120 “processor”; Fig. 10 item 142 “remote server, item 965 “personal computer”, item 970 “mobile device”), the method comprising:
obtaining first actual driving data associated with a first plurality of vehicles driving on an actual road within a first zone (See at least: Fig. 10 items 101 and 102; Col. 4 lines 17-42 via “(19) The vehicle may also include a geographic position component 144 in communication with computer 110 for determining the geographic location of the device. For example, the position component may include a GPS receiver to determine the device's latitude, longitude and/or altitude position. Other location systems such as laser-based localization systems, inertial-aided GPS, or camera-based localization may also be used to identify the location of the vehicle. The location of the vehicle may include an absolute geographical location, such as latitude, longitude, and altitude as well as relative location information, such as location relative to other cars immediately around it which can often be determined with less noise than absolute geographical location. The device may also include other features in communication with computer 110, such as an accelerometer, gyroscope or another direction/speed detection device 146 to determine the direction and speed of the vehicle or changes thereto. By way of example only, acceleration device 146 may determine its pitch, yaw or roll (or changes thereto) relative to the direction of gravity or a plane perpendicular thereto. The device may also track increases or decreases in speed and the direction of such changes. The device's provision of location and orientation data as set forth herein may be provided automatically to the user, computer 110, other computers and combinations of the foregoing.);
generating, based on the first actual driving data, vehicle driving patterns for each of a plurality of areas within the actual road, wherein the first actual driving data comprises speed data, heading data, and location data of at least one vehicle of the first plurality of vehicles (See at least: Col. 9 lines 23-31 via “Returning to FIG. 5, vehicle 101 may record the position and movement data of vehicle 510 and vehicle ‘
520. In doing so, vehicle 101 can detect that vehicle 520 has de-accelerated and is changing its heading in the direction of arrow A2. Similarly, vehicle 101 detects that vehicle 510 has changed its heading as provided by arrow B2. Vehicle 101 may then access stored road graph data that represents vehicle the current environment of vehicles 510 and 520, such as road graph 600 illustrated in FIG. 6.”); and
controlling, based on the generated vehicle driving patterns, at least one of: autonomous driving simulation; or autonomous driving of a vehicle (See at least: Fig. 9; Col. 17 lines 26-60 via “While traveling in accordance with the control strategy, vehicle 101 detects the presence of numerous objects within one or more of the vehicle's sensor fields (Block 915). Upon detecting the objects, the computer 110 may classify the object based on the data received by vehicle 101's sensors and determine environmental information, such as its position and movement relative to other objects (Block 920). For example, the sensor data could be used to classify objects as being a pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle. As described above, the vehicle's computer 110 also uses the sensor data to determine the object's current state, such as speed, heading, and acceleration. Upon determining the objects classification and current state, the computer 110 may associate and track the detected objects with a road graph element by accessing a map in database 114 (FIG. 1), and determining whether the detected objects have performed a behavior of interest by comparing the object's position and movement with the map's road graph element (Block 925)…If the server has provided a modified behavior model, computer 110 may then alter the control strategy of autonomous vehicle 101 (Block 745). If not, Blocks 715 through 745 may then be repeated until autonomous vehicle 101 has reached its destination or the autonomous control has be otherwise terminated (Block 750). In this way, vehicle 101 may further alter the control strategy upon any of the detected vehicles performing an action of interest.”).
Regarding claim 7, Zhu teaches wherein the vehicle driving patterns for each of the plurality of areas represent a driving speed change pattern of the at least one vehicle (See at least: Col. 9 lines 23-31 via “Returning to FIG. 5, vehicle 101 may
record the position and movement data of vehicle 510 and vehicle 520. In doing so, vehicle 101 can detect that vehicle 520 has de-accelerated and is changing its heading in the direction of arrow A2. Similarly, vehicle 101 detects that vehicle 510 has changed its heading as provided by arrow B2. Vehicle 101 may then access stored road graph data that represents vehicle the current environment of vehicles 510 and 520, such as road graph 600 illustrated in FIG. 6.”).
Regarding claim 8, Zhu teaches wherein a particular area of the plurality of areas comprises a first vehicle driving pattern and a second vehicle driving pattern, and the first vehicle driving pattern and the second vehicle driving pattern are different from each other (See at least: Col. 9 lines 23-31 via “Returning to FIG. 5, vehicle 101 may
record the position and movement data of vehicle 510 and vehicle 520. In doing so, vehicle 101 can detect that vehicle 520 has de-accelerated and is changing its heading in the direction of arrow A2. Similarly, vehicle 101 detects that vehicle 510 has changed its heading as provided by arrow B2. Vehicle 101 may then access stored road graph data that represents vehicle the current environment of vehicles 510 and 520, such as road graph 600 illustrated in FIG. 6.” Note: Different cars have different driving patterns).
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.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Alalao (US 20200338983 hereinafter Alalao) and further in view of Zhao et al. (US Patent 11685408 hereinafter Zhao).Regarding claim 2, Zhu fails to teach wherein the generating the vehicle driving patterns for each of the plurality of areas comprises:
performing denoising on the first actual driving data;
generating a first cluster and a second cluster by performing clustering on the denoised first actual driving data;
generating, based on data included in the first cluster, vehicle driving patterns associated with a first area; and
generating, based on data included in the second cluster, vehicle driving patterns associated with a second area.
However, Alalao teaches performing denoising 402 filters the sensor data to remove noise from the sensor data using digital signal processing. For example, a median filter can be used to remove noise from an image or a sensor signal in a pre-processing step to improve the results of later processing.) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Zhu in view of Alalao to teach performing denoising on the first actual driving data so that the data processing results can be improved.
Modified Zhu further fails to teach the following limitation, but Zhao teaches generating a first cluster and a second cluster by performing clustering
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to take modified Zhu in view of Zhao to teach generating a first cluster and a second cluster by performing clustering on the denoised first actual driving data; generating, based on data included in the first cluster, vehicle driving patterns associated with a first area; and generating, based on data included in the second cluster, vehicle driving patterns associated with a second area so that the data needed for the vehicle may be divided into smaller parts in specified areas of the vehicle driving area.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Park et al. (US 11840262 hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 4, teaches Zhu fails to teach the following limitation, but Park teaches wherein the obtaining the first actual driving data comprises: receiving satellite map data associated with a second zone comprising the first zone; obtaining second actual driving data associated with a second plurality of vehicles driving on an actual road within the second zone; receiving information on at least one region including lanes on the satellite map data; and extracting the first actual driving data associated with the at least one region from the second actual driving data (See at least: Figs. 1 and 5; Claim 1 via “…wherein the vehicle includes a vehicle terminal, which controls autonomous driving according to a lane of a precise map based on high-precise positioning information obtained by correcting an error of satellite-based vehicle location information with the positioning error correction information, and wherein the control server includes a transception unit that collects state information according to operations of the vehicle and the road side unit, a vehicle inspection unit that analyzes the state information of the vehicle…”; Note: First and second zones can be considered by taking a smaller area including a road and traffic (i.e. first zone) encompassed by a larger area including the first zone and additional road(s) and traffic.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Zhu in view of Park to teach wherein the obtaining the first actual driving data comprises: receiving satellite map data associated with a second zone comprising the first zone; obtaining second actual driving data associated with a second plurality of vehicles driving on an actual road within the second zone; receiving information on at least one region including lanes on the satellite map data; and extracting the first actual driving data associated with the at least one region from the second actual driving data so that additional data from satellites can be used to map the lanes in first and second zones of interest to aid in effectively controlling autonomous vehicles on the road.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Alalao in view of Zhao and further in view of Taylor et al. (US 20240196105 hereinafter Taylor).
Regarding claim 5, modified Zhu teaches wherein the performing the denoising comprises: performing, based on the heading data, primary filtering on the first actual driving data but fails to disclose performing secondary filtering on the first actual driving data that has been subjected to the primary filtering by performing linear regression analysis.
However, Taylor teaches 2B illustrates the example plot 200 as in FIG. 2A but with a set of converted color calibration points 210-219 for image sensor 115, which for example, may correspond to the following color temperatures (in Kelvin): 20000, 10000, 6666, 5000, 4000, 3333, 2857, 2500, 2222, and 2000. A gray line 220 is also included in the plot 200, which may have been determined from the converted color calibration points 210-219 (e.g., by performing a linear regression analysis).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to take modified Zhu in view of Taylor to teach performing secondary filtering on the first actual driving data that has been subjected to the primary filtering by performing linear regression analysis in order to better filter the data to provide better analysis and use of the data to affect autonomous driving of a vehicle.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Alalao in view of Hatfield et al. (US 20240337501 hereinafter Hatfield).
Regarding claim 9, Zhu fails to teach the following limitation, but Hatfield teaches performing an autonomous driving simulation associated with an actual
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Zhu in view of Hatfield to teach performing an autonomous driving simulation associated with an actual road within the first zone based on the generated vehicle driving patterns for each of the plurality of areas in order to forecast how the vehicle will perform in the first zone.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is 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 Harry Oh whose telephone number is (571)270-5912. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 9:00-3:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY Y OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657