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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 20190163988 A1) in view of Nakasho (US 20200031283 A1).
Claim 1. Watanabe teaches a vehicle (Fig 1) configured to travel using a plurality of wheels, the vehicle comprising:
a display(Fig. 2 [0034] a display device 8); and
a processor ([0035] n electronic control unit (ECU) 14 ) configured to cause the display to display a panoramic image, wherein the panoramic image shows a situation around the vehicle in a manner that the vehicle is imaged from above the vehicle
([0037] The ECU 14 can also generate an image of a wider viewing angle, and generate a virtual bird's eye view image that is viewing the vehicle 1 from the above.).
Watanabe further teaches the use of the panoramic image including icons the icons being superimposed on the panoramic image and indicating positions of the wheels
([0061] The route index calculation unit 48 calculates a route index indicating the estimated traveling direction of the front wheels 3F of the vehicle 1,... Consequently, by displaying the route index, the driver can easily imagine the passing state of the wheels 3 from then on. (See Fig. 15) ).
Watanabe further discloses the process of superimposing gradient information and icons warning of specific travel paths of the wheel ([0081])
but does not specifically disclose recommended routes, and the recommended routes being superimposed on the panoramic image and indicating desired routes through which the wheels are expected to pass.
However, Nakasho teaches the use of recommended routes, and the recommended routes being superimposed on the panoramic image and indicating desired routes through which the wheels are expected to pass
([0092] The route calculating module 40 calculates a recommended route on which the vehicle 1 can travel more easily, using the roughness state of the road surface detected by the roughness state detecting module 32.
[0038][0116] FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating a display example for explaining a display manner in which a path marker on which driving is recommended is depicted as a guide marker in the periphery monitoring apparatus according to embodiments...FIG. 13 is a display example of the recommended routes SRL and SRR. When the recommended routes SRL and SRR are displayed...
[0055] The guide marker includes, for example, a path marker (tire track line, or predicted path) indicating the expected traveling direction of the wheels 3 based on the steering angle of the vehicle 1, and a virtual vehicle that looks traveling ahead on the road surface in front of the vehicle 1... (See also Figs. 7-9)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use the recommended routes being superimposed on the panoramic image as taught by Nakasho within the system of Watanabe for the purpose of enhancing the system to visually guide a driver to an easier path based on the roughness of a terrain.
Claim 2. Watanabe and Nakasho teach the vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising a ground surface shape sensor configured to measure a shape of a ground surface on which the vehicle travels, wherein the processor is configured to determine the recommended routes based on a measurement result from the ground surface shape sensor
(Watanabe [0047] The laser scanner 28 calculates the distance to the position where the laser light is reflected, by evaluating and calculating the received reflected light. As a result, the ECU 14 obtains relative state information (gradient information and relative inclination)
Nakasho [0055] The guide marker determined based on the roughness information of the road surface acquired by the laser scanner 28 is then superimposed on the image acquired by the imager 15c that is a monocular camera. [0092] The route calculating module 40 calculates a recommended route on which the vehicle 1 can travel more easily, using the roughness state of the road surface detected by the roughness state detecting module 32. ).
Claim 3. Watanabe and Nakasho teach the vehicle according to claim 2, wherein the processor is configured to determine the recommended routes to pass around an obstacle higher than a ground clearance of the vehicle and not to pass around an obstacle lower than the ground clearance
(Watanabe [0076] the display mode determination unit 54 does not change the display color of the route index R, and for example, sets the display color to a normal color of “blue” (S132). (e.g. lower than ground clearance)
[0081] In the case of FIG. 15, the display color of a portion that the vehicle 1 may be unable to travel (route index Ra) is changed, in the route index R of the right side front wheel 3F… Furthermore, in the case of FIG. 15, character information (for example, Attention) is added on the route index Ra, thereby enabling the driver to pay attention more easily. (e.g. higher than the ground clearance)
[0065] Furthermore, the display color of the route index R is set to “yellow”, when there is a gradient the driver should pay attention. For example, the route index R is displayed in a normal color such as “blue” or “white”, when there is an irregularity, but the irregularity cannot be identified as a gradient, or when notification is not necessarily required.).
Claim 4. Watanabe and Nakasho teach the vehicle according to claim 3, wherein the panoramic image further includes a first icon and a second icon, the first icon being superimposed on the panoramic image in a first display format and indicating the obstacle higher than the ground clearance, and the second icon being superimposed on the panoramic image in a second display format different
from the first display format and indicating the obstacle lower than the ground clearance
([0081] Furthermore, in the case of FIG. 15, character information (for example, Attention) is added on the route index Ra, thereby enabling the driver to pay attention more easily.
(e.g. first display with attention icon)
[0082] A symbol 64 viewing the vehicle 1 from above, and a plurality of divided areas 66 (for example, 5×5) are illustrated in a sub-screen area SV of the display device 8... the vehicle 1 may be unable to travel, a divided area 66a is indicated in “red”...The periphery of the divided area 66b displayed in “yellow” is also set as an attention attracting display 66bb in similar “yellow” such that the driver needs to pay attention.
(e.g. second display with icons 66a, 66b)).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe and Nakasho and further in view of Freess (US 20150353095 A1).
Claim 5. Watanabe and Nakasho teach the vehicle according to claim 2, and further discloses the process of determining elevations of surfaces on a traveling path as well as determining risks of underbody of the vehicle (Nakasho [0097] a region 72 is, for example, a protrusion having such a height that rubs the bottom surface of the vehicle) and recommending routes for an easier path but does not specifically disclose wherein the processor is configured to determine the recommended routes to cause the wheels to pass along ruts in snow accumulated on the ground surface.
However, Freess teaches wherein the processor is configured to determine the recommended routes to cause the wheels to pass along ruts in snow accumulated on the ground surface
([0015] In the step of classifying, for example, the terrain unevenness may be classified as a ramp and/or a transverse bump formed transversely to the driving direction. In the step of ascertaining, the piece of information for driving may be ascertained as a piece of information for carrying out a steering movement to initiate a negotiation of the ramp and/or the transverse bump in an onward driving direction which extends obliquely to the ramp and/or the transverse bump… The transverse bump may be composed of solid terrain or be formed by a snow bank or a sand dune.
[0017] The longitudinal bump may be a ground elevation which extends in the driving direction and exists between two wheel ruts of a roadway and which may represent a risk for damage to an underbody of the vehicle.
[0061]-[0063] [0061] Method 700 for assisting a driver when driving off-road and on unpaved roads may be carried out in different functional variants...In a second functional variant, the piece of information is ascertained in step 706 in such a way that it contains a recommendation for the driver on how he or she may circumnavigate the critical situation.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use a processor to provide the recommended routes to cause the wheels to pass along ruts in snow accumulated on the ground surface as taught by Freess within the system of Watanabe and Nakasho for the purpose of enhancing system to navigate terrains through inclement weather and preventing damage to the vehicle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUFUS C POINT whose telephone number is (571)270-7510. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/RUFUS C POINT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights