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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of embodiment 1, claims 1-5, in the reply filed on 12/5/25 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 4/8/26. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyeon et al (KR 10-2270625) in view of Iso (2023/0026188)
Hyeon et al (see attached English translation), in Figs. 1, 2, and 4, discloses the same road situation detection device as specified in claim 1 of the present invention, comprising one of more processors 150; and memory 130 storing instructions thereon [0040], the instructions when executed by the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to receive a captured image [0068] of a road section 10; distinguish between a driving road region and a non-driving road region in the captured image [0003], verify reliability of the distinguished driving road region and responsive to the reliability being verified as reliable [0005], determine an abnormal situation (e.g. reverse driving) regarding driving of a vehicle object 20 in the captured image [0032].
Although Hyeon discloses taking images of vehicles, it is noted that Hyeon differs from the present invention in that it fails to particularly disclose analyzing tire friction sound of these vehicles as specified in claims 1-5, 21, and 22. Iso however, in Figures 5, 6, and 12, teaches the concept of such well-known tire friction sound data analysis in the data processing device 35 of the detection device
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having both the references of Hyeon et al and Iso before him/her, to incorporate the well-known tire friction sound data analysis technique as taught by Iso in the road situation detection device of Hyeon in order to efficiently and accurately recognize the kind of vehicle on the road.
Claim 2, Hyeon discloses the instructions cause the processors to distinguish between the driving road region 10 and the non-driving road region (e.g. Fig. 1) in the captured image, based on a pretrained region distinguishing model (e.g. AI learning), and to determine that the driving road region is a roadway [0001].
Claim 3, Hyeon discloses wherein the region distinguishing model is a deep learning model [0001] trained to distinguish between driving road region 10, in which a vehicle 20 travels, and non-driving road region [0037], in which non-vehicle moving objects (e.g. bicycle) move based on a movement speed and a movement trajectory of moving objects (e.g. not motor vehicle) identified in images 210 captured under identical shooting conditions [0040].
Claim 4, Hyeon wherein the specific moving objects 20 are moving objects that are capable of moving on driving road regions and non-driving road regions.
Claim 5, Hyeon wherein the abnormal situation comprises presence of a vehicle object 20 driving in a direction opposite to a driving direction of the driving road region (e.g. one-way), and stopping the vehicle object in situations other than predefined normal situations [0051]-[0052].
Regarding claims 21 and 22, Hyeon discloses data (e.g. other than vehicles) associated with specific moving objects capable of moving on roadways and sidewalks is excluded from the training; and at least one of scooters and bikes [0037].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 21, and 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
20260011153 discloses METHOD FOR EVALUATING AND/OR IMPROVING A TOTAL DEPTH MAP OF A MONITORING AREA AND TOTAL DEPTH MAP ARRANGEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTING THE METHOD
20260011172 discloses ANIMAL IDENTIFICATION AND FORECASTING SYSTEM AND METHOD
20260011154 discloses INCIDENT SURVEILLANCE USING UNMANNED MOBILE MACHINES
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 YOUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7334. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 11 - 7.
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.
/Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights