DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This final office action is in response to the Amendments filed on 26 May 2026, regarding application number 18/946,791.
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 .
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 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.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 1, 8, 11 and 19 were amended in the Amendments to the Claims. Claims 2-7, 9-10, 12-18 and 20 are original.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 11 have overcome the objection previously set forth in the non-final office action mailed 26 February 2026. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
The Terminal Disclaimer filed has been approved. Therefore, the nonstatutory double patenting rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-11, filed 26 May 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for at least the reasons discussed in the previous office action. However, upon further consideration and for the purpose of compact prosecution, a new ground(s) of rejection is made further in view of newly cited reference Kumari et al. (US 20250126436 A1). See full details below.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 20200008028 A1 and Yang hereinafter), in view of Kumari et al. (US 20250126436 A1 and Kumari hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1
Yang teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs; [0003]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see all Figs.; [0003 "A sensing vehicle may comprise one or more sensors on-board the vehicle. The one or more sensors may collect behavior data about one or more surrounding vehicles within a detectable range of the sensing vehicle ... Such information may be used to generate a safe driving index for the one or more surrounding vehicles, and/or the sensing vehicle."], [0028], [0057] and [0117]-[0120]; the sensing vehicle corresponds to the claimed "first vehicle" and the surrounding vehicle(s)/target vehicle(s) corresponds to the claimed "subject vehicle");
processing, by the first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0003], [0028 "The behavior data of the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle may be collected and/or aggregated, and analyzed. The analyzed behavior may be used to detect safe or unsafe driving behavior by the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle. A safe driving index may be generated and associated with a vehicle identifier of a corresponding vehicle and/or driver identifier of a driver operating the corresponding vehicle."]-[0029], [0116], [0125]-[0126] and [0163]); and
transferring, by the first vehicle, the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see [0102], [0116]-[0118 "The first and second sensing vehicles may share the information gathered about the target vehicle ... Alternatively or in addition, the first and second sensing vehicles may transit the information to a data center."] and [0127]-[0129]).
Yang is silent regarding transferring the processed driving behavior data in response to detecting an event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs.; [0004]-[0006]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see Figs. 1-2, all; [0004 "In some cases, a UE (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions to support sensor targeting (for example, to identify other UEs, pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or some combination thereof)."]-[0005], [0046 "A user equipment (UE) (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions, and may identify surrounding radar targets (e.g., objects such as other UEs (e.g., other vehicles), pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or the like)."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]);
processing, by the first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data (see [0004]-[0005 "The UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target and may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target."], [0046 "In a V2X system, one or more UEs may each use a radar to identify a list of targets to track. For example, a UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target. Upon receiving a reflection of the radar waveform, the UE may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target. That is, the reflection of the radar waveform may indicate the physical attributes of the radar target. Specifically, the UE may determine values for one or more radar measurement parameters (e.g., location, velocity, dimensions, orientation, and uncertainty values for each value) for the radar target."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]); and
in response to detecting an event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, transferring, by the first vehicle, the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."], [0081 "...a first UE may transmit an indication of a set of target objects tracked by a sensor at the first UE ... Additionally or alternatively, the UE 215-a may indicate the set of target objects to the centralized control entity 205. For example, the UE 215-a may transmit a tracked or predicted target object list, and a level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects."], [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."] and [0093 "At 320, the UE 315-a may transmit an indication of the set of target objects. to a centralized control entity 305. In some cases, the UE 315-a may also indicate the level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects. In some cases, the UE 315-a may transmit one or more parameters to the centralized control entity 305. For example, the parameters may include a location, a mobility, a predicted behavior, a predicted path, a sensor performance specification, a tracked target object list, a predicted target object list with predicated estimation accuracies, or a combination thereof."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Yang to include instructions for transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity in response to detecting an event which interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 2
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang further teaches wherein the second detecting entity comprises at least one of a second vehicle and roadside infrastructure (see Fig. 6, sensing vehicles 610 and data center 630; [0049], [0118 "The first and second sensing vehicles may share the information gathered about the target vehicle ... Alternatively or in addition, the first and second sensing vehicles may transit the information to a data center."], [0127], [0141] and [0151]; the first/second sensing vehicle(s) and/or the data center correspond to the second vehicle or roadside infrastructure).
Kumari additionally teaches wherein the second detecting entity comprises a roadside infrastructure (see Fig. 2, "centralized control entity 205"; [0023 "...the first UE includes a vehicular UE and the centralized control entity includes a road-side unit"], [0047] and [0078]).
Regarding Claim 3
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang is silent regarding wherein the event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle comprises a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches wherein the event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle comprises a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."] and [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Yang to include instructions for transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 4
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang further teaches wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, unsafe driving behavior by the subject vehicle based on the collected driving behavior data (see [0003], [0028 "The behavior data of the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle may be collected and/or aggregated, and analyzed. The analyzed behavior may be used to detect safe or unsafe driving behavior by the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle. A safe driving index may be generated and associated with a vehicle identifier of a corresponding vehicle and/or driver identifier of a driver operating the corresponding vehicle."]-[0029], [0116], [0125]-[0126] and [0163]); and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected unsafe driving behavior does not satisfy a threshold factor for unsafe driving behavior that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0171]-[0172 "If the safe driving index does not exceed a particular threshold, the UBI may not offer any insurance for that vehicle."]).
Regarding Claim 7
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang further teaches wherein the driving behavior data is collected from one or more image and proximity sensors of the first vehicle (see [0047 "The one or more sensors 110 carried by the sensing vehicle may include, but are not limited to location sensors (e.g., global positioning system (GPS) sensors, mobile device transmitters enabling location triangulation), vision sensors (e.g., imaging devices capable of detecting visible, infrared, or ultraviolet light, such as cameras), proximity sensors (e.g., ultrasonic sensors, lidar, time-of-movement cameras),..."] and [0062]).
Regarding Claim 8
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang further teaches further comprising:
constructing, by the first vehicle, a pseudo-identification for the subject vehicle (see Figs. 8 and 11, all; [0028], [0129 "For instance, a label indicating “speeding” may take less memory than a still image or video clip showing the vehicle speeding. The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity. For examples they may include category of behavior (e.g., speeding, running red light, unsafe merge, unsafe lane change, not stopping for stop sign, not yielding to pedestrians, etc.), time at which the behavior occurred, location at which the behavior occurred, and/or information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."], [0144]-[0146], [0175]-[0181]); and
transferring, by the first vehicle, the pseudo-identification to the second detecting entity (see [0102], [0116]-[0118] and [0127]-[0129 "The sensing vehicle may only transmit descriptions to a data center that are indicative of instances of unsafe or safe driving behaviors, or other categories of behavior, as described elsewhere herein. The sensing vehicle may only transmit descriptions that may seem relevant to the other functions or applications of the vehicle monitoring system as described elsewhere herein. This may also apply to descriptions that may be transmitted to and/or shared with other vehicles in addition to or as an alternative to the descriptions transmitted to the data center."]).
Yang is silent regarding transferring the pseudo-identification in response to detecting the event which interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches further comprising:
constructing, by the first vehicle, a pseudo-identification for the subject vehicle (see [0004]-[0005 "The UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target and may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target."], [0046 "In a V2X system, one or more UEs may each use a radar to identify a list of targets to track. For example, a UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target. Upon receiving a reflection of the radar waveform, the UE may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target. That is, the reflection of the radar waveform may indicate the physical attributes of the radar target. Specifically, the UE may determine values for one or more radar measurement parameters (e.g., location, velocity, dimensions, orientation, and uncertainty values for each value) for the radar target."], [0074]-[0075], [0079 "In some examples, UEs 215 may perform sensor measurements (e.g., by radar sensing) to identify one or more targets. For instance, UEs 215 may attempt to identify other UEs 215 (e.g., other vehicles, other devices carried by pedestrians or within other vehicles, or the like) or targets 210 (e.g., pedestrians, structures, or the like)."] and [0092]); and
in response to detecting the event which interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, transferring, by the first vehicle, the pseudo-identification to the second detecting entity (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."], [0081 "...a first UE may transmit an indication of a set of target objects tracked by a sensor at the first UE ... Additionally or alternatively, the UE 215-a may indicate the set of target objects to the centralized control entity 205. For example, the UE 215-a may transmit a tracked or predicted target object list, and a level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects."], [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."] and [0093 "At 320, the UE 315-a may transmit an indication of the set of target objects. to a centralized control entity 305. In some cases, the UE 315-a may also indicate the level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects. In some cases, the UE 315-a may transmit one or more parameters to the centralized control entity 305. For example, the parameters may include a location, a mobility, a predicted behavior, a predicted path, a sensor performance specification, a tracked target object list, a predicted target object list with predicated estimation accuracies, or a combination thereof."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Yang to include instructions for transferring the pseudo-identification to a second vehicle in response to detecting an event which interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 9
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 8 (as discussed above in claim 8),
Yang further teaches wherein the pseudo-identification comprises one or more hash values corresponding to at least one of the following:
vehicle type (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity ... information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."]);
vehicle color (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity ... information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."]); and
location of the subject vehicle within a road section (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity. For examples they may include category of behavior (e.g., speeding, running red light, unsafe merge, unsafe lane change, not stopping for stop sign, not yielding to pedestrians, etc.), time at which the behavior occurred, location at which the behavior occurred..."]).
Regarding Claim 10
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang further teaches further comprising:
determining, by the first vehicle, that the subject vehicle is within observable range of the second detecting entity (see Fig. 4, all; [0092 "A sensing vehicle 400 may have a detectable range 405. The detectable range may be relative to the sensing vehicle and/or an inertial reference frame. In one example, the detectable range may include areas in front of and behind the sensing vehicle. One or more of the surrounding vehicles may fall within the detectable range, such as vehicles 410, 420, 430."]-[0096], [0102], [0117]-[0118]).
Regarding Claim 11
Yang teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs; [0003]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see all Figs.; [0003 "A sensing vehicle may comprise one or more sensors on-board the vehicle. The one or more sensors may collect behavior data about one or more surrounding vehicles within a detectable range of the sensing vehicle ... Such information may be used to generate a safe driving index for the one or more surrounding vehicles, and/or the sensing vehicle."], [0028], [0057] and [0117]-[0120]; the sensing vehicle corresponds to the claimed "first vehicle" and the surrounding vehicle(s)/target vehicle(s) corresponds to the claimed "subject vehicle");
processing, by the first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0003], [0028 "The behavior data of the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle may be collected and/or aggregated, and analyzed. The analyzed behavior may be used to detect safe or unsafe driving behavior by the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle. A safe driving index may be generated and associated with a vehicle identifier of a corresponding vehicle and/or driver identifier of a driver operating the corresponding vehicle."]-[0029], [0116], [0125]-[0126] and [0163]); and
transferring, by the first vehicle, the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see [0102], [0116]-[0118 "The first and second sensing vehicles may share the information gathered about the target vehicle ... Alternatively or in addition, the first and second sensing vehicles may transit the information to a data center."] and [0127]-[0129]).
Yang is silent regarding transferring the processed driving behavior data in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs.; [0003]-[0007]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see Figs. 1-2, all; [0004 "In some cases, a UE (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions to support sensor targeting (for example, to identify other UEs, pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or some combination thereof)."]-[0005], [0046 "A user equipment (UE) (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions, and may identify surrounding radar targets (e.g., objects such as other UEs (e.g., other vehicles), pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or the like)."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]);
processing, by the first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data (see [0004]-[0005 "The UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target and may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target."], [0046 "In a V2X system, one or more UEs may each use a radar to identify a list of targets to track. For example, a UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target. Upon receiving a reflection of the radar waveform, the UE may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target. That is, the reflection of the radar waveform may indicate the physical attributes of the radar target. Specifically, the UE may determine values for one or more radar measurement parameters (e.g., location, velocity, dimensions, orientation, and uncertainty values for each value) for the radar target."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]); and
in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, transferring, by the first vehicle, the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."], [0081 "...a first UE may transmit an indication of a set of target objects tracked by a sensor at the first UE ... Additionally or alternatively, the UE 215-a may indicate the set of target objects to the centralized control entity 205. For example, the UE 215-a may transmit a tracked or predicted target object list, and a level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects."], [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."] and [0093 "At 320, the UE 315-a may transmit an indication of the set of target objects. to a centralized control entity 305. In some cases, the UE 315-a may also indicate the level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects. In some cases, the UE 315-a may transmit one or more parameters to the centralized control entity 305. For example, the parameters may include a location, a mobility, a predicted behavior, a predicted path, a sensor performance specification, a tracked target object list, a predicted target object list with predicated estimation accuracies, or a combination thereof."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Yang to include instructions for transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 12
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 11 (as discussed above in claim 11),
Yang further teaches wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, unsafe driving behavior by the subject vehicle based on the collected driving behavior data (see [0003], [0028 "The behavior data of the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle may be collected and/or aggregated, and analyzed. The analyzed behavior may be used to detect safe or unsafe driving behavior by the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle. A safe driving index may be generated and associated with a vehicle identifier of a corresponding vehicle and/or driver identifier of a driver operating the corresponding vehicle."]-[0029], [0116], [0125]-[0126] and [0163]); and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected unsafe driving behavior does not satisfy a threshold factor for unsafe driving behavior that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0171]-[0172 "If the safe driving index does not exceed a particular threshold, the UBI may not offer any insurance for that vehicle."]).
Regarding Claim 15
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 11 (as discussed above in claim 11),
Yang further teaches wherein the driving behavior data is collected from one or more image and proximity sensors of the first vehicle (see [0047 "The one or more sensors 110 carried by the sensing vehicle may include, but are not limited to location sensors (e.g., global positioning system (GPS) sensors, mobile device transmitters enabling location triangulation), vision sensors (e.g., imaging devices capable of detecting visible, infrared, or ultraviolet light, such as cameras), proximity sensors (e.g., ultrasonic sensors, lidar, time-of-movement cameras),..."] and [0062]).
Regarding Claim 16
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 11 (as discussed above in claim 11),
Yang further teaches further comprising:
constructing, by the first vehicle, a pseudo-identification for the subject vehicle (see Figs. 8 and 11, all; [0028], [0129 "For instance, a label indicating “speeding” may take less memory than a still image or video clip showing the vehicle speeding. The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity. For examples they may include category of behavior (e.g., speeding, running red light, unsafe merge, unsafe lane change, not stopping for stop sign, not yielding to pedestrians, etc.), time at which the behavior occurred, location at which the behavior occurred, and/or information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."], [0144]-[0146], [0175]-[0181]); and
transferring, by the first vehicle, the pseudo-identification to a second vehicle (see [0102], [0116]-[0118] and [0127]-[0129 "The sensing vehicle may only transmit descriptions to a data center that are indicative of instances of unsafe or safe driving behaviors, or other categories of behavior, as described elsewhere herein. The sensing vehicle may only transmit descriptions that may seem relevant to the other functions or applications of the vehicle monitoring system as described elsewhere herein. This may also apply to descriptions that may be transmitted to and/or shared with other vehicles in addition to or as an alternative to the descriptions transmitted to the data center."]).
Yang is silent regarding transferring the pseudo-identification in response to detecting the change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches further comprising:
constructing, by the first vehicle, a pseudo-identification for the subject vehicle (see [0004]-[0005 "The UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target and may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target."], [0046 "In a V2X system, one or more UEs may each use a radar to identify a list of targets to track. For example, a UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target. Upon receiving a reflection of the radar waveform, the UE may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target. That is, the reflection of the radar waveform may indicate the physical attributes of the radar target. Specifically, the UE may determine values for one or more radar measurement parameters (e.g., location, velocity, dimensions, orientation, and uncertainty values for each value) for the radar target."], [0074]-[0075], [0079 "In some examples, UEs 215 may perform sensor measurements (e.g., by radar sensing) to identify one or more targets. For instance, UEs 215 may attempt to identify other UEs 215 (e.g., other vehicles, other devices carried by pedestrians or within other vehicles, or the like) or targets 210 (e.g., pedestrians, structures, or the like)."] and [0092]); and
in response to detecting the change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, transferring, by the first vehicle, the pseudo-identification to a second vehicle (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."], [0081 "...a first UE may transmit an indication of a set of target objects tracked by a sensor at the first UE ... Additionally or alternatively, the UE 215-a may indicate the set of target objects to the centralized control entity 205. For example, the UE 215-a may transmit a tracked or predicted target object list, and a level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects."], [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."] and [0093 "At 320, the UE 315-a may transmit an indication of the set of target objects. to a centralized control entity 305. In some cases, the UE 315-a may also indicate the level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects. In some cases, the UE 315-a may transmit one or more parameters to the centralized control entity 305. For example, the parameters may include a location, a mobility, a predicted behavior, a predicted path, a sensor performance specification, a tracked target object list, a predicted target object list with predicated estimation accuracies, or a combination thereof."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Yang to include instructions for transferring the pseudo-identification to a second vehicle in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 17
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 16 (as discussed above in claim 16),
Yang further teaches wherein the pseudo-identification comprises one or more hash values corresponding to at least one of the following:
vehicle type (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity ... information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."]);
vehicle color (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity ... information about the vehicle performing the behavior (e.g., vehicle identifier such as license plate, color of vehicle, make of vehicle, mode of vehicle, vehicle brand, vehicle type)."]); and
location of the subject vehicle within a road section (see [0072] and [0129 "The descriptions may be stored as text or in any other format. The descriptions may include any level of specificity. For examples they may include category of behavior (e.g., speeding, running red light, unsafe merge, unsafe lane change, not stopping for stop sign, not yielding to pedestrians, etc.), time at which the behavior occurred, location at which the behavior occurred..."]).
Regarding Claim 18
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 11 (as discussed above in claim 11),
Yang further teaches further comprising:
determining, by the first vehicle, that the subject vehicle is within observable range of the second detecting entity (see Fig. 4, all; [0092 "A sensing vehicle 400 may have a detectable range 405. The detectable range may be relative to the sensing vehicle and/or an inertial reference frame. In one example, the detectable range may include areas in front of and behind the sensing vehicle. One or more of the surrounding vehicles may fall within the detectable range, such as vehicles 410, 420, 430."]-[0096], [0102], [0117]-[0118]).
Regarding Claim 19
Yang teaches a first vehicle (see all Figs; [0003]) comprising:
one or more processers including machine executable instructions in non-transitory memory (see [0004] and [0151]) to cause the first vehicle to:
collect driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see all Figs.; [0003 "A sensing vehicle may comprise one or more sensors on-board the vehicle. The one or more sensors may collect behavior data about one or more surrounding vehicles within a detectable range of the sensing vehicle ... Such information may be used to generate a safe driving index for the one or more surrounding vehicles, and/or the sensing vehicle."], [0028], [0057] and [0117]-[0120]; the sensing vehicle corresponds to the claimed "first vehicle" and the surrounding vehicle(s)/target vehicle(s) corresponds to the claimed "subject vehicle");
process the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0003], [0028 "The behavior data of the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle may be collected and/or aggregated, and analyzed. The analyzed behavior may be used to detect safe or unsafe driving behavior by the one or more surrounding vehicles and/or the sensing vehicle. A safe driving index may be generated and associated with a vehicle identifier of a corresponding vehicle and/or driver identifier of a driver operating the corresponding vehicle."]-[0029], [0116], [0125]-[0126] and [0163]); and
transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see [0102], [0116]-[0118 "The first and second sensing vehicles may share the information gathered about the target vehicle ... Alternatively or in addition, the first and second sensing vehicles may transit the information to a data center."] and [0127]-[0129]).
Yang is silent regarding transferring the processed driving behavior data in response to detecting an event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches a first vehicle (see all Figs.; [0004]-[0006]) comprising:
one or more processers including machine executable instructions in non-transitory memory (see [0007]) to cause the first vehicle to:
collect driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see Figs. 1-2, all; [0004 "In some cases, a UE (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions to support sensor targeting (for example, to identify other UEs, pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or some combination thereof)."]-[0005], [0046 "A user equipment (UE) (e.g., a vehicle equipped with one or more radar transmitters) may transmit radar waveforms in one or more directions, and may identify surrounding radar targets (e.g., objects such as other UEs (e.g., other vehicles), pedestrians, obstructions, buildings, or the like)."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]);
process the collected driving behavior data (see [0004]-[0005 "The UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target and may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target."], [0046 "In a V2X system, one or more UEs may each use a radar to identify a list of targets to track. For example, a UE may transmit a radar waveform in a direction of a radar target. Upon receiving a reflection of the radar waveform, the UE may identify one or more physical attributes of the radar target. That is, the reflection of the radar waveform may indicate the physical attributes of the radar target. Specifically, the UE may determine values for one or more radar measurement parameters (e.g., location, velocity, dimensions, orientation, and uncertainty values for each value) for the radar target."], [0074]-[0075], [0079] and [0092]); and
in response to detecting an event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."], [0081 "...a first UE may transmit an indication of a set of target objects tracked by a sensor at the first UE ... Additionally or alternatively, the UE 215-a may indicate the set of target objects to the centralized control entity 205. For example, the UE 215-a may transmit a tracked or predicted target object list, and a level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects."], [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."] and [0093 "At 320, the UE 315-a may transmit an indication of the set of target objects. to a centralized control entity 305. In some cases, the UE 315-a may also indicate the level of accuracy for tracking the set of target objects. In some cases, the UE 315-a may transmit one or more parameters to the centralized control entity 305. For example, the parameters may include a location, a mobility, a predicted behavior, a predicted path, a sensor performance specification, a tracked target object list, a predicted target object list with predicated estimation accuracies, or a combination thereof."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the processor of Yang to include instructions for transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity in response to detecting an event which interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Regarding Claim 20
Modified Yang teaches the first vehicle of claim 19 (as discussed above in claim 19),
Yang is silent regarding wherein the event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle comprises a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle.
Kumari teaches wherein the event that interrupts the first vehicle from collecting additional driving behavior data associated with the subject vehicle comprises a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle (see Fig. 2, all; Abstract, all; [0006], [0077]-[0084], [0092]-[0094] and [0167]-[0168], especially [0080 "In some examples, a UE 215 may experience radar interference or blockage. For example, another UE 215 or some other object may block the target 210 from the sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-a may be unable to detect a target 210-a and a target 210-b due to the UE 215-b blocking the UE 215-a's LoS ... Additionally or alternatively, a UE 215 may be unable to detect targets located outside of the respective sensing range 220. For example, the UE 215-c may not be able to detect the target 210-b, due to the target 210-b's location beyond the sensing range 220-c."] and [0083 "In some other cases, the inter-UE tracking assistance request may be associated with an event-based inter-UE tracking assistance, such as inter-vehicle radar handover for a target 210. In some examples, the UE 215-a may determine that a tracked object (e.g., the target 210-a or target 210-b), is missing from some measurements. For example, the target 210 may be blocked by another UE 215 (e.g., UE 215-b) or another object. Additionally or alternatively, the target 210 may be outside of the UE 215-a's sensing range 220 ... The UE 215-a may request an event-based inter-vehicle radar handover for a particular target for a given duration based on determining that the target estimation accuracy associated with the at least one target object does not satisfy the threshold."]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the processor of Yang to include instructions for transferring the processed driving behavior data to a second detecting entity in response to detecting a change in positional relationship between the first vehicle and the subject vehicle, as taught by Kumari, in order to assist the first vehicle with tracking the subject vehicle to obtain more comprehensive tracking information and increase overall safety, vehicle comfort, and traffic efficiency.
Claims 5-6 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (as modified by Kumari) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Pipe et al. (US 20210049908 A1 and Pipe hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 5
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1),
Yang is silent regarding wherein the collected driving behavior data comprises lane offset measurements for the subject vehicle.
Pipe teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs.; [0005]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see Fig. 2, step 206; [0005 "The hazard detection system includes a second sensor configured to detect second sensor data associated with a surrounding environment of the vehicle. The second sensor data includes driving patterns of one or more other vehicles."], [0022] and [0048]; the vehicle corresponds to the claimed "first detecting vehicle" and the other vehicles/surrounding vehicles corresponds to the claimed "subject vehicle"); and
processing, by the first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see Fig. 2, steps 208-210; [0005 "The electronic control unit is configured to obtain the first sensor data and the second sensor data. The electronic control unit is configured to determine that a hazardous condition is present based on the driver behavior patterns or the driving patterns of the one or more other vehicles."]-[0006] and [0050]-[0052]);
wherein the collected driving behavior data comprises lane offset measurements for the subject vehicle (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway.'] and [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the process of modified Yang to include instructions to measure lane offset of the subject vehicle for detecting swerving of the subject vehicle, as taught by Pipe, in order to alert a driver of the detecting vehicle of the hazardous subject vehicle.
Regarding Claim 6
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 5 (as discussed above in claim 5),
Yang is silent regarding wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, swerving by the subject vehicle based on the lane offset measurements; and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely.
Pipe teaches wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, swerving by the subject vehicle based on the lane offset measurements (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway."] and [0090]); and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway."] and [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the process of modified Yang to include instructions to detect swerving by the subject vehicle based on lane offset measurements and determine that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely, as taught by Pipe, in order to alert a driver of the detecting vehicle of the hazardous subject vehicle.
Regarding Claim 13
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 11 (as discussed above in claim 11),
Yang is silent regarding wherein the collected driving behavior data comprises lane offset measurements for the subject vehicle.
Pipe teaches a computer-implemented method (see all Figs.; [0005]) comprising:
collecting, by a first vehicle, driving behavior data associated with a subject vehicle (see Fig. 2, step 206; [0005 "The hazard detection system includes a second sensor configured to detect second sensor data associated with a surrounding environment of the vehicle. The second sensor data includes driving patterns of one or more other vehicles."], [0022] and [0048]; the vehicle corresponds to the claimed "first detecting vehicle" and the other vehicles/surrounding vehicles corresponds to the claimed "subject vehicle"); and
processing, by a first vehicle, the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see Fig. 2, steps 208-210; [0005 "The electronic control unit is configured to obtain the first sensor data and the second sensor data. The electronic control unit is configured to determine that a hazardous condition is present based on the driver behavior patterns or the driving patterns of the one or more other vehicles."]-[0006] and [0050]-[0052]);
wherein the collected driving behavior data comprises lane offset measurements for the subject vehicle (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway.'] and [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the process of modified Yang to include instructions to measure lane offset of the subject vehicle for detecting swerving of the subject vehicle, as taught by Pipe, in order to alert a driver of the detecting vehicle of the hazardous subject vehicle.
Regarding Claim 14
Modified Yang teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 13 (as discussed above in claim 13),
Yang is silent regarding wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, swerving by the subject vehicle based on the lane offset measurements; and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely.
Pipe teaches wherein processing the collected driving behavior data to determine whether the subject vehicle is driving unsafely comprises:
detecting, by the first vehicle, swerving by the subject vehicle based on the lane offset measurements (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway."] and [0090]); and
determining, by the first vehicle, that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely (see [0068 "For example, the hazard detection system 100 may measure the lateral motion of the vehicle in front of the vehicle 102 and when the lateral motion is greater than a threshold amount, the hazard detection system 100 may determine that the vehicle in front is swerving in and out of the lane of the roadway."] and [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the process of modified Yang to include instructions to detect swerving by the subject vehicle based on lane offset measurements and determine that the detected swerving does not satisfy a threshold swerving factor that indicates the subject vehicle is driving unsafely, as taught by Pipe, in order to alert a driver of the detecting vehicle of the hazardous subject vehicle.
Conclusion
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 TANNER LUKE CULLEN whose telephone number is (303)297-4384. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 MT.
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, Khoi Tran can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/TANNER L CULLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights