DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Application filed on 01 November 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending. The claims have been considered and examined.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-13 and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 8-10, 12, 13, and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,147,320. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-5, 8-1012, 13, and 16 of ‘320 contain every element of claims 1-13 and 16 of the instant application and as such anticipate claims 1-13 and 16 of the instant application. While claims 1-13 and 16 of the instant application are directed to an apparatus and claims 1-5, 8-10,12, 13, and 16 are directed to a method, a method claim is merely an alternative embodiment of an apparatus.
Claim 1 of the instant application maps to claim 1 of ‘320.
Claim 2 of the instant application maps to claim 8 of ‘320.
Claim 3 of the instant application maps to claim 4 of ‘320.
Claim 4 of the instant application maps to claim 1 of ‘320.
Claim 5 of the instant application maps to claim 2 of ‘320.
Claim 6 of the instant application maps to claim 3 of ‘320.
Claim 7 of the instant application maps to claim 5 of ‘320.
Claim 8 of the instant application maps to claim 9 of ‘320.
Claim 9 of the instant application maps to claim 10 of ‘320.
Claim 10 of the instant application maps to claim 12 of ‘320.
Claim 11 of the instant application maps to claim 12 of ‘320.
Claim 12 of the instant application maps to claim 13 of ‘320.
Claim 13 of the instant application maps to claim 16 of ‘320.
Claim 16 of the instant application maps to claim 12 of ‘320.
"A later patent claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim is obvious over, or anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding of obviousness- type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus). " ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v BARR LABORATORIES, INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golov, U.S. Patent App. Pub. 2020/0250902, hereinafter referred to as “Golov”, in view of Motwani, U.S. Patent App. Pub. 2017/0147429, hereinafter referred to as “Motwani”.
Referring to claim 1, Golov discloses an apparatus for collecting and storing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0016). - An apparatus comprising:
Golov discloses a plurality of sensors providing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0048). - a plurality of sensors configured to receive and transmit data;
Golov discloses the apparatus has a first and second buffer, thus memory (See Golov, paragraphs 068-0072). - a first memory and a second memory,
Golov discloses the system has one or more processors that are interconnected to the memory (See Golov, paragraphs 0062 and 0154). - a processor coupled to the first memory and the second memory, wherein the processor is configured to:
Golov discloses recoding sensor data from vehicles that include a computer system (See Golov, paragraphs 0002 and 0062). Golov discloses a plurality of sensors providing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0048). - receive the data from the plurality of sensors;
Golov discloses a first buffer, thus memory, and a second buffer, thus memory, and the buffers buffer at least a portion of the sensor data stream (See Golov, abstract, paragraph 0041 and 0077). Golov discloses the first buffer buffers sensor data related to an accident the second buffer buffers sensor data not related to accidents (See Golov, paragraph 0092). - sort a first portion of the data to the first memory and a second portion of the data to the second memory based on attributes associated with individual sensors of the plurality of sensors; and
Golov discloses a ADAS processing the sensor data and generating a signal in response to processing the sensor data from the sensor data in the accident data buffer or first buffer (See Golov, paragraph 0018, 0029, 0051, and 0092). - analyze the first portion of the data in the first memory to identify a result; and
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data to the server (See Golov, paragraph 0037). - a transceiver configured to transmit the second portion of the data from the second memory to a cloud-computing device.
Golov does not disclose “wherein the first memory has a faster access rate than the second memory;”. However, Golov does disclose the first buffer is for accident data (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Motwani discloses a computing system with various sensors (See Motwani, paragraph 0064). Motwani discloses a memory with a two-tiered memory, a near memory, thus first memory, that is faster, and a far memory, thus second memory, that is slower (See Motwani, paragraph 0010-0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to combine the sensor recording in a first and second buffer of Golov with the two-tiered memory with one being faster than the other of Motwani. This would have been obvious to do because the faster memory provides faster access to items more often accessed by the system (See Motwani, paragraph 0011), like during the critical moments of an accident (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Referring to claim 2, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses the remote server providing updates to the vehicle that are used by the ADAS computer system (See Golov, paragraphs 0002 and 0103). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is further configured to receive feedback from the cloud-computing device, and wherein the processor is further configured to initiate an intervention process based on the feedback.
Referring to claim 3, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses the data is transmitted to the remote server over a time period of hours or days (See Golov, paragraph 0046). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second portion of the data is transmitted from the second memory to the cloud computing device at a predetermined time interval.
Referring to claim 5, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses in response to the signal, copies the contents of the buffer into non-volatile memory (See Golov, paragraph 0031). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to initiate an intervention process based on the result.
Referring to claim 6, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses sensor data for accident buffer is collected every 30 seconds while the sensor data for the other buffer is lower at 3 minutes (See Golov, paragraphs 0034 and 0041). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one sensor of the plurality of sensors has a higher data collection rate than another one of the plurality of sensors.
Referring to claim 7, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses using machine learning on the sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0018). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to sort the first portion of the data and the second portion of the data by implementing a machine learning algorithm.
Referring to claim 8, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses the signal is based on the sensor data in the buffer (See Golov, paragraph 0018, 0029, 0051, and 0092). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first memory comprises a logic table, and wherein the processor configured to determine the result based on the logic table.
Referring to claim 9, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 1) including Golov discloses transmitting recorder data, including the buffers to a remote server (See Golov, paragraphs 0023 and 0037). - The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit the first portion of the data to the cloud-computing device after the first portion of the data is analyzed.
Referring to claim 10, Golov discloses an apparatus for collecting and storing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0016). - An apparatus comprising:
Golov discloses the apparatus has a first and second buffer, thus memory (See Golov, paragraphs 068-0072). - a first memory and a second memory,
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data to the server (See Golov, paragraph 0037). - a transceiver configured to receive data from a plurality of computing devices,; and
Golov discloses the system has one or more processors (See Golov, paragraphs 0062 and 0154). - a processor configured to:
Golov discloses recoding sensor data from vehicles that include a computer system (See Golov, paragraphs 0002 and 0062). Golov discloses a plurality of sensors providing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0048). - receive the data from the transceiver;
Golov discloses a first buffer, thus memory, and a second buffer, thus memory, and the buffers buffer at least a portion of the sensor data stream (See Golov, abstract, paragraph 0041 and 0077). Golov discloses the first buffer buffers sensor data related to an accident the second buffer buffers sensor data not related to accidents (See Golov, paragraph 0092). - sort a first portion of the data to the first memory and a second portion of the data to the second memory based on data types of the data;
Golov discloses a ADAS processing the sensor data and generating a signal in response to processing the sensor data from the sensor data in the accident data buffer or first buffer (See Golov, paragraph 0018, 0029, 0051, and 0092). - analyze the first portion of the data and generate a result reflective of the data received from the computing device; and
Golov discloses in response to the signal, copies the contents of the buffer into non-volatile memory (See Golov, paragraph 0031). - generate a directive based on the result,
Golov discloses the signal is generated for the data recorder (See Golov, paragraph 0029). - wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit the directive to at least one computing device of the plurality of computing device, and wherein the directive includes an intervention.
Golov does not disclose “wherein the first memory has a faster access rate than the second memory;”. However, Golov does disclose the first buffer is for accident data (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Motwani discloses a computing system with various sensors (See Motwani, paragraph 0064). Motwani discloses a memory with a two-tiered memory, a near memory, thus first memory, that is faster, and a far memory, thus second memory, that is slower (See Motwani, paragraph 0010-0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to combine the sensor recording in a first and second buffer of Golov with the two-tiered memory with one being faster than the other of Motwani. This would have been obvious to do because the faster memory provides faster access to items more often accessed by the system (See Motwani, paragraph 0011), like during the critical moments of an accident (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Referring to claim 11, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 10) including Golov discloses a plurality of sensors providing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0048). - The apparatus of claim 10, wherein each computing device of the plurality of computing devices comprises a plurality of sensors.
Referring to claim 12, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 10) including Golov discloses transmitting recorder data, including the buffers to a remote server (See Golov, paragraphs 0023 and 0037). - The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the transceiver is further configured to: transmit the first portion of the data stored in the first memory to a data center;
Golov discloses the remote server providing updates to the vehicle that are used by the ADAS computer system (See Golov, paragraphs 0002 and 0103). - receive an instruction from the data center; and transmit the directive to the at least one computing device based on the instruction from the data center.
Referring to claim 13, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 12) including Golov discloses the remote server providing updates to the vehicle that are used by the ADAS computer system, wherein the updates include road maps that includes information such as traffic speeds (See Golov, paragraphs 0002, 0018, 0019, and 0103). Golov discloses updating using machine learning (See Golov, paragraph 0103). - The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the transceiver is further configured to receive supplementary data and the processor is configured to generate the result of the received data with the supplementary data based on a machine learning algorithm.
Referring to claim 14, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 13) including updating things like maps that used to compare sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0021). - The apparatus of claim 13, wherein the supplementary data is processed as the second portion of the data.
Referring to claim 15, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 10) including Golov discloses sensor data for accident buffer is collected every 30 seconds while the sensor data for the other buffer is lower at 3 minutes, thus analyzed faster (See Golov, paragraphs 0034 and 0041). - The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the first portion of the data is analyzed at a faster rate than the second portion of the data.
Referring to claim 16, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 10) including stopping buffering incoming new sensor data to preserve its contents (See Golov, paragraph 0035). - The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the intervention comprises stopping or changing an operation of the at least one of the plurality of computing devices.
Referring to claim 17, Golov discloses an apparatus for collecting and storing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0016). - A system comprising:
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data from a vehicles, thus from multiple vehicles on the road (See Golov, Fig. 1, paragraph 0037 and 0048). - a plurality of computing devices configured to receive data;
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data to a remote server, thus cloud device (See Golov, paragraph 0037). - a cloud-computing device configured to receive the data from the plurality of computing devices, wherein the cloud-computing device comprises:
Golov discloses the apparatus has a first and second buffer, thus memory (See Golov, paragraphs 068-0072). - a first memory and a second memory,
Golov discloses the system has one or more processors (See Golov, paragraphs 0062 and 0154). - a processor configured to:
Golov discloses a first buffer, thus memory, and a second buffer, thus memory, and the buffers buffer at least a portion of the sensor data stream (See Golov, abstract, paragraph 0041 and 0077). Golov discloses the first buffer buffers sensor data related to an accident the second buffer buffers sensor data not related to accidents (See Golov, paragraph 0092). - sort a first portion of the data to the first memory and a second portion of the data to the second memory based on data types of the data;
Golov discloses a ADAS processing the sensor data and generating a signal in response to processing the sensor data from the sensor data in the accident data buffer or first buffer (See Golov, paragraph 0018, 0029, 0051, and 0092). - analyze the first portion of the data and generate a result based on the analysis; and
Golov discloses in response to the signal, copies the contents of the buffer into non-volatile memory (See Golov, paragraph 0031). - generate a directive of at least one of the plurality of computing devices, wherein the directive includes an intervention; and
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data to the server (See Golov, paragraph 0037). - a transceiver configured to transmit the first portion of the data and the second portion of the data to a data center; and
Golov discloses the signal is generated for the data recorder (See Golov, paragraph 0029). Golov discloses the remote server providing updates to the vehicle that are used by the ADAS computer system (See Golov, paragraphs 0002 and 0103). - the data center configured to generate a decision based on the first portion of the data and the second portion of the data sent by the cloud computing device, wherein the decision comprises a suggestion for at least one of the plurality of computing devices.
Golov does not disclose “wherein the first memory has a faster access rate than the second memory;”. However, Golov does disclose the first buffer is for accident data (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Motwani discloses a computing system with various sensors (See Motwani, paragraph 0064). Motwani discloses a memory with a two-tiered memory, a near memory, thus first memory, that is faster, and a far memory, thus second memory, that is slower (See Motwani, paragraph 0010-0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to combine the sensor recording in a first and second buffer of Golov with the two-tiered memory with one being faster than the other of Motwani. This would have been obvious to do because the faster memory provides faster access to items more often accessed by the system (See Motwani, paragraph 0011), like during the critical moments of an accident (See Golov, paragraph 0034).
Referring to claim 18, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 17) including Golov discloses the remote server providing updates to the vehicle that are used by the ADAS computer system, wherein the updates include road maps that includes information such as traffic speeds, thus local road laws (See Golov, paragraphs 0002, 0018, 0019, and 0103). Golov discloses updating using machine learning (See Golov, paragraph 0103). - The system of claim 17, wherein the processor of the cloud-computing device utilizes a machine learning algorithm, and wherein the machine learning algorithm includes supplementary data comprising at least one of weather and local laws.
Referring to claim 19, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 18) including Golov discloses updating using machine learning (See Golov, paragraph 0103). - The system of claim 18, wherein the machine learning algorithm is updated with the suggestion from the data center.
Referring to claim 20, Golov and Motwani discloses all the limitations (See rejection of claim 17) including Golov discloses a plurality of sensors providing sensor data (See Golov, paragraph 0048). -The system of claim 17, wherein each of the plurality of computing devices comprising: a plurality of sensors configured to receive sensor data;
Golov discloses the apparatus has a first and second buffer, thus memory (See Golov, paragraphs 068-0072). Golov discloses transmit the data from a vehicles, thus from multiple vehicles on the road each with their own buffer memory, thus a third and fourth memory (See Golov, Fig. 1, paragraph 0037 and 0048). Motwani discloses a memory with a two-tiered memory, a near memory, thus first memory, that is faster, and a far memory, thus second memory, that is slower (See Motwani, paragraph 0010-0012). - a third memory and a fourth memory, wherein the third memory has a faster access rate than the fourth memory;
Golov discloses the system has one or more processors and from multiple vehicles a processor, thus a second processor (See Golov, Fig 1., paragraphs 0048, 0062, and 0154). - a second processor coupled to the third memory and the fourth memory, wherein the processor is configured to:
Golov discloses a first buffer, thus memory, and a second buffer, thus memory, and the buffers buffer at least a portion of the sensor data stream (See Golov, abstract, paragraph 0041 and 0077). Golov discloses the first buffer buffers sensor data related to an accident the second buffer buffers sensor data not related to accidents (See Golov, paragraph 0092). - sort a first portion of the sensor data to the third memory and a second portion of the sensor data to the fourth memory based on attributes associated with individual sensors of the plurality of sensors; and
Golov discloses a ADAS processing the sensor data and generating a signal in response to processing the sensor data from the sensor data in the accident data buffer or first buffer (See Golov, paragraph 0018, 0029, 0051, and 0092). - analyze the first portion of the sensor data in the third memory; and
Golov discloses using a cellular communications network to transmit the data to the server (See Golov, paragraph 0037). - a second transceiver configured to transmit the second portion of the sensor data as the data from the fourth memory to the cloud-computing device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 11,782,978 to Zakian et al.
- Techniques for storing and analyzing data
U.S. Patent App. Pub. 2024/0012711 to Wu
- Redundant multiple port memory for vehicle applications
U.S. Patent App. Pub. 2018/0286210 to Frascati-Robinson et al.
- Systemic resource utilization analysis with sensor data
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH D MANOSKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-3648. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am to 3:30pm.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at 571-272-3655. 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 D MANOSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113 January 24, 2026