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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were/was submitted on 10/25/2024, and 03/05/2026. The information disclosure statement(s) have/has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 04/20/2021.
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending.
No claims are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
No claims are cancelled.
No claims are added.
Claim 1 is an independent claim.
Claims 1-2 will be examined.
This Non-Final Office action is in response to the “Claims” dated 10/25/2024.
Objection to Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
During examination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP §2111, MPEP §2111.01 and In re Yamamoto et al., 222 USPQ 934 10 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. See MPEP 2111.01 (I). It is further noted it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification, i.e., a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment. See 15 MPEP 2111.01 (II).
A first exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the Applicant for patent has provided a lexicographic definition for the term. See MPEP §2111.01 (IV). Following a review of the claims in view of the specification herein, the Office has found that Applicant has not provided any lexicographic definitions, either expressly or implicitly, for any claim terms or phrases with any reasonable clarity, deliberateness and precision. Accordingly, the Office concludes that Applicant has not acted as his/her own lexicographer.
A second exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the claimed feature is written as a means-plus-function. See 35 U.S.C. §112(f) and MPEP §2181-2183. As noted in MPEP §2181, a three-prong test is used to determine the scope of a means-plus-function limitation in a claim:
the claim limitation uses the term "means" or "step" or a term used as a substitute for "means" that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function
the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word "for" (e.g., "means for") or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"
the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The Office reviewed the claims for terms containing limitations of means or means type language that must be analyzed under 35 U.S.C. §112 (f), and no terms are being interpreted as such.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AICH et al., US 20190383622, herein further known as Aich, in view of TAKECHI et al., WO 2019/176629, herein further known as Takechi.
Regarding claim 1, Aich discloses a vehicle operation system (¶¶ [0023-0024], [0068], see also FIG. 7), comprising: a first vehicle capable of autonomous driving and a second vehicle capable of autonomous driving (¶¶ [0023-0024], vehicle 202 (i.e. first vehicle) separate vehicle (i.e. second vehicle), [0049], [0051], autonomous vehicles); a (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, and [0023-0024], [0054], [0064], set of service areas (i.e. first operation area), see also Fig. 2A-2B, and Fig. 6A-6B); and a (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, and [0023-0024], [0054], [0064], set of service areas (i.e. second operation area), see also Fig. 2A-2B, and Fig. 6A-6B), wherein in a case where a destination of a user who gets in the first vehicle in the first operation area is located in the second operation area, the (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, see also Fig. 7; ¶¶ [0023-0024], [0054], operation areas, see also Fig. 2A-2B, Fig. 6A-6B; ¶¶ [0016-0024], calculate requests that contain route, destination, border/transfer point, and current position), then sends an operation instruction to the first vehicle to instruct to run from the current position to the border point (¶¶ [0016-0024], see also claim 16),
However, Aich does not explicitly state communicating also with the first operation management server, obtains position information from the first vehicle, and sends a shift signal to the second management server to shift operation management of the
Takechi teaches communicating also with the first operation management server, obtains position information from the (¶¶ [0007], [0013-0030], plurality of control servers for different areas and capable of controlling multiple vehicles, [0036-0038], servers interconnected communication, [0087], control server associated with an area where a particular vehicle operates, [0094-0096], transmit control request information).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Aich the communicating also with the first operation management server, obtains position information from the first vehicle, and sends a shift signal to the second management server to shift operation management of the first vehicle to the second management server when the first vehicle arrives at the border point, and upon receipt of the shift signal from the first operation management server, the second operation management server communicates with the first vehicle to manage operation of the first vehicle as taught by Takechi.
One would be motivated to modify Aich in view of Takechi for the reasons stated in Takechi paragraph [0019], a more robust method and system to make it possible to avoid excessive load concentration on any one server. Furthermore, this more robust method and system would ensure optimal connection for a vehicle to an operation management server in any given operation area.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Aich, and Takechi, further in view of ICHIMURA et al., JP 2015069584, herein further known as Ichimura.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Aich, and Takechi, disclose all limitations of claim 1 above.
Aich discloses further the (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, and [0023-0024], [0054], [0064], set of service areas (i.e. first operation area), see also Fig. 2A-2B, and Fig. 6A-6B); (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, and [0023-0024], [0054], [0064], set of service areas (i.e. second operation area), see also Fig. 2A-2B, and Fig. 6A-6B) (¶¶ [0037], [0068], [0090-0092], plurality of servers, see also Fig. 7; ¶¶ [0023-0024], [0054], operation areas, see also Fig. 2A-2B, Fig. 6A-6B; ¶¶ [0016-0024], calculate requests that contain route, destination, border/transfer point, and current position), (¶¶ [0016-0024], see also claim 16),
Takechi teaches communicating also with the first operation management server, obtains position information from the management server communicates with the (¶¶ [0007], [0013-0030], plurality of control servers for different areas and capable of controlling multiple vehicles, [0036-0038], servers interconnected communication, [0087], control server associated with an area where a particular vehicle operates, [0094-0096], transmit control request information).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Aich the communicating also with the first operation management server, obtains position information from the first vehicle, and sends a shift signal to the second management server to shift operation management of the first vehicle to the second management server when the first vehicle arrives at the border point, and upon receipt of the shift signal from the first operation management server, the second operation management server communicates with the first vehicle to manage operation of the first vehicle as taught by Takechi.
One would be motivated to modify Aich in view of Takechi for the reasons stated in Takechi paragraph [0019], a more robust method and system to make it possible to avoid excessive load concentration on any one server. Furthermore, this more robust method and system would ensure optimal connection for a vehicle to an operation management server in any given operation area.
Furthermore, Aich does not explicitly state instruct to move back to the first operation area after completion of transport of the user.
Ichimura teaches instruct to move back to the first operation area after completion of transport of the user (Abstract, a station of a vehicle return destination where the vehicle is returned, and paragraphs state “when the vehicle is returned,” “operation for returning the vehicle 4 (return operation)”).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate in to Aich the instruct to move back to the first operation area after completion of transport of the user as taught by Ichimura.
One would be motivated to modify Aich in view of Ichimura for the reasons stated in Ichimura Abstract, more robust methods and system that enable improvement in degree of freedom of vehicle uses by users.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666