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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits, claims 1-20 are currently pending and addressed below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 11/21/2024 has been considered. An initialed copy of the IDS is enclosed herewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190111916 , to Lee et al. (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches A parking support apparatus configured to execute an automatic parking control for making a vehicle travel automatically to a designated space designated by a user to park the vehicle in the designated space automatically, wherein, the parking support apparatus is configured to; (See at least paragraph [] “determining the autonomous driving mode from among the first mode and the second mode may include based on a determination that the target parking position has been set, determining the first mode as the autonomous driving mode”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0268] “in the configuration step 30, the vehicle 100 may be instructed to perform parking [S31]”). Furthermore, (See at least paragraph [0271] “the user can directly designate a specific parking space as the target parking position [S32]”).
end the automatic parking control when a predetermined end condition is satisfied; make the vehicle travel automatically to search for an available space in which the vehicle can park, when the parking support apparatus determines that the vehicle cannot park in the designated space while the vehicle travels automatically to the designated space; (See at least paragraph [0017] “switching the autonomous driving mode may include based on satisfaction of a first condition in which the target parking position is unavailable for parking the vehicle, switching the autonomous driving mode from the first mode to the second mode”). Lee teaches that the first mode and the second mode are, (See at least paragraph [0010] “an autonomous driving mode of the vehicle from among a first mode for controlling a speed of the vehicle to move the vehicle to the target parking position and a second mode for controlling a movement path of the vehicle to search for an available parking position”).
automatically park the vehicle in the available space when the parking support apparatus finds the available space; (See at least paragraph [0017] “switching the autonomous driving mode from the first mode to the second mode, and based on satisfaction of a second condition in which the target parking position is available for parking the vehicle, switching the autonomous driving mode from the second mode to the first mode”).
and inform the user that there is no available space when the parking support apparatus finds no available space by a time at which the end condition is satisfied. (See at least paragraph [0017] “a condition in which a period of time elapsed for attempts for parking the vehicle at the target parking position is outside of a predetermined period of time.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0076] “The user interface device 200 may receive a user input, and provide information generated in the vehicle 100 to the user.”).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Lee further disclose, wherein, the parking support apparatus is configured to: search the available space, even before the parking support apparatus determines that the vehicle cannot park in the designated space; and automatically park the vehicle in the available space, if the parking support apparatus finds the available space when the parking support apparatus determines that the vehicle cannot park in the designated space. (See at least paragraph [0296] “If there are other available parking spaces when the target parking position is initially configured in the step S30, such additional spaces may be considered together with the parking spaces detected in the step S131 in configuring the new target parking position, and thus the optimal new target parking position can be configured. Thereafter, the vehicle 100 can start autonomous driving according to the first mode again by performing the steps S110 to S130 without entering the second mode for searching for a parking space, which will be described later. That is, in the searching step S131, the vehicle 100 can simultaneously detect parking spaces while being driven in first mode, and thus reconfigure the optimal target parking position without entering the second mode and restart the first mode. Hence, through the searching step S131, the vehicle 100 can perform parking rapidly and efficiently.”).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Lee further disclose, wherein, the parking support apparatus is configured to park the vehicle in the available space without ending the automatic parking control, when the end condition is satisfied during a time period from a time at which the parking support apparatus finds the available space to a time at which the vehicle completes parking in the available space. (See at least paragraph [0019] “autonomously driving the vehicle in the second mode may include stopping the vehicle around the potential parking space for a predetermined time, and determining whether the potential parking space is available within the predetermined time, based on a determination that the potential parking space is unavailable within the predetermined time, restarting autonomously driving the vehicle along a predetermined path to search for another parking space.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0328] “ although the vehicle configures the parking path E to the empty parking position S1, the vehicle 100 may determine that it fails to park using the parking path E within a predetermined time or a predetermined number of attempts.”).
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 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.
Claims 3, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190111916 , to Lee et al. (hereinafter Lee), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210354686, to Pan et al (hereinafter Pan).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the claimed features of claim 1, Lee fails to explicitly disclose, however Pan discloses wherein, the parking support apparatus is configured to determine that the end condition is satisfied when a travel distance that the vehicle has traveled from a start point at which the automatic parking control is started is equal to or longer than a threshold distance. (See at least paragraph [0080-0082] “the automatic parking control device 4 determines whether the distance of the vehicle is greater than or equal to the length of the parking path that the current parking sub-path needs to execute; if not, the process proceeds to S53; if so, the process proceeds to S55. At S53, the automatic parking control device 4 determines a relationship between the distance-measurement value collected by the sensors Rd1-Rd12 and a preset collision threshold; if all the distance-measurement values collected by the sensors Rd1-Rd12 are greater than or equal to the collision threshold, the control over the parking sub-path is continued; if one of the distance-measurement values collected by the ultrasonic sensors Rd1-Rd12 is smaller than the collision threshold, the process proceeds to S54. At S54, the control over the current parking sub-path is terminated,”).
Lee as modified by Pan, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, parking systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Pan because incorporating the ending the parking based off of distance will aid Lee with avoiding the vehicle of continuously moving further from the user position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wesam Almadhrhi whose telephone number is (571) 270-3844. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WESAM NMN ALMADHRHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666