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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202410772678.5, filed on 06/14/2024.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18 filed on 08/28/2026 are presently examined. Claims 1 and 5 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Regarding 35 USC 101, Applicant’s amendments and arguments result in the withdrawal of the 101 rejection.
Regarding 35 USC 112(b) Applicant’s amendments and clarifying remarks result in the withdrawal of the 112(b) rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites:
PNG
media_image1.png
62
863
media_image1.png
Greyscale
And
PNG
media_image2.png
52
787
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, “union” U is not supported in the specification. There is support for the limitations as previously written with intersection.
The specification paragraphs recited in Applicant’s arguments do not provide support these limitations.
Further, claim 1 recites “transmitting the optimal transfer paths to respective transport vehicles within the flood-affected area for displaying on satellite positioning navigation” and “transmitting the updated optimal transfer path to the transport vehicle affected for displaying on satellite positioning navigation in real time.” Similarly, there is no support for this in the specification.
The specification paragraphs recited in Applicant’s arguments do not provide support for these limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 are objected to as they are rejected under 35 USC 101. If claims 1-18 overcome said 35 USC 112(a) rejection, claims 1-18 would be allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The closest prior art of record are:
Wang et al. (River Flood Risk Model - doi.org/10.3390/w14010057), Cavalcante et al. (US 20130116920 A1), Witriol et al. (US 20250182491 A1), and Maltby (US 20120051603 A1), and Witriol (US 12536906 B1) hereinafter referred to as Wang, Cavalcante, Witriol, Maltby, and Witriol (2).
Wang discloses a flood model to simulate floods using a Muskingum model, MIKE, and two-dimensional hydrodynamic model in combination with GIS data to describe the effect on roads to produce evacuation plans.
Cavalcante discloses a travel routing system using a geographical database and flood simulator using meteorological data to determine the routes. Zones of flood risk are produced by the routing system which indicate high risk flood zones versus no risk zones. The system routes vehicles based on the flood risk.
Witriol discloses a road condition tagging system which tags, and stores in a database, conditions such as road segment lengths and widths, flood zone information, and road junction or intersection information for use in planning a route for a vehicle.
Waltby discloses a data base which compares old and new flood maps to determine which areas have changed. Waltby teaches street segments that may be associated with flood zone changes.
Witriol (2) discloses a system for managing one or more vehicles based on context information including hazard information and performing active measures based on said hazard information. Vehicle information including its size and weight are included in consideration of routing based on hazards.
None of the prior art alone nor in combination reasonably teach or suggest the following limitations from claim 1:
determining a road information matrix and a resettlement zone information matrix based on the time-varying vector map of the flood-affected area, wherein the road information matrix comprises: a segment junction status matrix, a segment length matrix, a segment width matrix, a segment traffic index matrix, and a segment grade matrix;
by applying a custom matrix criterion based on the road information matrix, the resettlement zone information matrix, the location information of transport vehicles within the flood-affected area, and the transport vehicle dataset, and considering time-related variations of a flooded road matrix, road emergencies, road collapse incidents, and areas of mud-covered roads, defining a vehicle driving direction as a specified forward direction and a reverse driving direction as a specified reverse direction, thus determining an update mode for a road time-varying matrix;
wherein the custom matrix criterion is defined as follows:
PNG
media_image3.png
27
412
media_image3.png
Greyscale
;
an update mode for the road time-varying matrix during a time-related variation of the flooded road matrix is as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
62
863
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an update mode for the road time-varying matrix during a road emergency is as follows:
PNG
media_image4.png
36
297
media_image4.png
Greyscale
;
an update mode for the road time-varying matrix during a road collapse incident is as follows:
PNG
media_image5.png
57
633
media_image5.png
Greyscale
;
an update mode for the road time-varying matrix when mud covers a road is as follows:
PNG
media_image2.png
52
787
media_image2.png
Greyscale
minimizing an arrival time of a last evacuated transport vehicle and with an edge region traffic density, a total vehicle count in resettlement zones, and vehicle speeds on various roads as constraints;
solving the time-varying dynamic-planning traffic scheduling model to determine an optimal scheduling plan for a current moment that comprises optimal transfer paths respectively for the transport vehicles, and transmitting the optimal transfer paths to respective transport vehicles within the flood-affected area for displaying on satellite positioning-navigation; and
in case of emergencies, updating the road information matrix in real time based on drone observations, obtaining an updated optimal transfer path for a transport vehicle affected by the emergencies, based on Bellman-Ford algorithm, Floyd-Warshall algorithm, and Diikstra's algorithm, and transmitting the updated optimal transfer path to the transport vehicle affected for displaying on satellite positioning navigation in real time.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MARK R HEIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/M.R.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
