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 .
Response to Amendment
1. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
2. Claims 1, 6, 11, and 16 are currently amended.
3. The 112(b) rejections to Claims 6 and 16 have been overcome.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nickolaou (US 20110060478 A1) in view of Giovanardi (US 20220324421 A1).
8. Regarding Claim 1, Nickolaou teaches a method performed by a vehicle system for enabling estimation of a condition of a road, the method comprising (Nickolaou: [0005]):
Obtaining, from a sensor mounted on a vehicle, first data comprising a first plurality of data points, wherein each of the first plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of a part of the road at a first time (Nickolaou: [0025] and [0028] Note that the surface of the target area is equivalent to longitudinal and lateral coordinates and the variations/curvatures in the scan lines are equivalent to the vertical coordinates.);
And segmenting the first plurality of data points into a plurality of segmented data areas based on the longitudinal and lateral coordinates of the first plurality of data points by dividing a representation of the part of the road into the plurality of segmented data areas and assigning each of the first plurality of data points to a segmented data area based on the longitudinal and lateral coordinates of the first plurality of data points (Nickolaou: [0032]).
Nickolaou fails to explicitly teach obtaining a second plurality of data points, wherein each of the second plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of the part of the road at a second time, wherein the first time is more recent than the second time; and estimating a respective vertical position in each segmented data area the estimating step further comprising calculating the respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of the second plurality of data points and a motion state of the vehicle at the second time, wherein the motion state of the vehicle comprises at least one of a longitudinal velocity, a lateral velocity, a vertical velocity, a roll angle, a pitch angle and a yaw angle of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Giovanardi teaches obtaining a second plurality of data points, wherein each of the second plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of the part of the road at a second time, wherein the first time is more recent than the second time (Giovanardi: [0067]);
And estimating a respective vertical position in each segmented data area the estimating step further comprising calculating the respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of the second plurality of data points and a motion state of the vehicle at the second time, wherein the motion state of the vehicle comprises at least one of a longitudinal velocity, a lateral velocity, a vertical velocity, a roll angle, a pitch angle and a yaw angle of the vehicle (Giovanardi: [0128], [0129], and [0216]).
Nickolaou and Giovanardi are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicular terrain detection systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nickolaou to incorporate the teachings of Giovanardi to obtain a second plurality of data point at a second time and estimate a vertical position of each segmented data area because it provides the benefit of determining an upcoming road profile to change vehicle system to better traverse the change in vertical positioning. This provides the additional benefit of increased safety and comfort for the passengers of the vehicle.
9. Regarding Claim 2, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Giovanardi teaches estimating the condition of the road based on the estimated respective vertical positions (Giovanardi: [0128] and [0190]).
10. Regarding Claim 3, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 2, and further, Nickolaou teaches calculating a mean of the vertical coordinates of the first plurality of data points for each segmented data area based on vertical coordinates of the first plurality of data points and wherein the condition of the road is estimated based on the calculated means (Nickolaou: [0025] Note that the use of a plurality of scan lines to determine the changes in elevation at corresponding positions of the target area is equivalent to calculating a mean of the vertical coordinates because the changes elevation are variations in the mean that is used to determine depressions and bumps.).
11. Regarding Claim 4, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Nickolaou teaches the sensor comprises one or more Light Detection and Ranging, LIDAR, sensors (Nickolaou: [0025]).
12. Regarding Claim 5, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Giovanardi teaches the motion state of the vehicle is estimated based on sensor data received from one or more motion tracking sensor and/or rotation wheel speed sensors of the vehicle (Giovanardi: [0128] and [0129]).
13. Regarding Claim 6, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 5, and further, Giovanardi teaches the sensor data is received from an inertial measurement unit, IMU, and/or from a wheel speed sensor, WSS (Giovanardi: [0123]).
14. Regarding Claim 7, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 2, and further, Giovanardi teaches the condition of the road comprises at least one of a curvature of the road, an inclination of the road, a banking of the road, an anomaly of the road, and a smoothness of the road, wherein the anomaly of the road comprises at least one of a road bump, an undulation, a pothole and a manhole cover (Giovanardi: [0190]).
15. Regarding Claim 8, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 2, and further, Nickolaou teaches adjusting a regenerative braking force of the vehicle based on the estimated condition and/or adjusting a speed profile based on the estimated condition (Nickolaou: [0038]).
16. Regarding Claim 9, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 2, and further, Nickolaou teaches adjusting a steering, a suspension and/or a speed of the vehicle based on the estimated condition (Nickolaou: [0038]).
17. Regarding Claim 10, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 2, and further, Giovanardi teaches obtaining second data indicative of a steering angle to estimate segmented data areas among the plurality of segmented data areas where the vehicle might travel and wherein estimating the condition of the road is further based on the estimated segmented areas (Giovanardi: [0071], [0128], and [0190] Note that the reference trajectory is equivalent to the steering angle to estimate segmented data areas where the vehicle might travel.).
18. Regarding Claim 11, Nickolaou teaches a vehicle system comprising a memory, and a controller configured to (Nickolaou: [0005]):
Obtain, from a sensor mounted on a vehicle, first data comprising a first plurality of data points, wherein each of the first plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of a part of the road at a first time (Nickolaou: [0025] and [0028] Note that the surface of the target area is equivalent to longitudinal and lateral coordinates and the variations/curvatures in the scan lines are equivalent to the vertical coordinates.);
And segment the first plurality of data points into a plurality of segmented data areas based on the longitudinal and lateral coordinates of the first plurality of data points by dividing a representation of the part of the road into the plurality of segmented data areas and assigning each of the first plurality of data points to a segmented data area based on the longitudinal and lateral coordinates of the first plurality of data points (Nickolaou: [0032]).
Nickolaou fails to explicitly teach to obtain a second plurality of data points, wherein each of the second plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of the part of the road at a second time, wherein the first time is more recent than the second time; and estimate a respective vertical position in each segmented data area by calculating the respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of the second plurality of data points and a motion state of the vehicle at the second time, wherein the motion state of the vehicle comprises at least one of a longitudinal velocity, a lateral velocity, a vertical velocity, a roll angle, a pitch angle and a yaw angle of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Giovanardi teaches to obtain a second plurality of data points, wherein each of the second plurality of data points comprises longitudinal, lateral and vertical coordinates representing respective dimensions of the part of the road at a second time, wherein the first time is more recent than the second time (Giovanardi: [0067]);
And estimate a respective vertical position in each segmented data area by calculating the respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of the second plurality of data points and a motion state of the vehicle at the second time, wherein the motion state of the vehicle comprises at least one of a longitudinal velocity, a lateral velocity, a vertical velocity, a roll angle, a pitch angle and a yaw angle of the vehicle (Giovanardi: [0128], [0129], and [0216]).
Nickolaou and Giovanardi are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicular terrain detection systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nickolaou to incorporate the teachings of Giovanardi to obtain a second plurality of data point at a second time and estimate a vertical position of each segmented data area because it provides the benefit of determining an upcoming road profile to change vehicle system to better traverse the change in vertical positioning. This provides the additional benefit of increased safety and comfort for the passengers of the vehicle.
19. Regarding Claim 12, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Giovanardi teaches to estimate the condition of the road based on the estimated respective vertical positions (Giovanardi: [0128] and [0190]).
20. Regarding Claim 13, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 12, and further, Nickolaou teaches to calculate a mean of the vertical coordinates of the first plurality of data points for each segmented data area based on vertical coordinates of the first plurality of data points and wherein the condition of the road is estimated based on the calculated means (Nickolaou: [0025] Note that the use of a plurality of scan lines to determine the changes in elevation at corresponding positions of the target area is equivalent to calculating a mean of the vertical coordinates because the changes elevation are variations in the mean that is used to determine depressions and bumps.).
21. Regarding Claim 14, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Nickolaou teaches the sensor comprises one or more Light Detection and Ranging, LIDAR, sensors (Nickolaou: [0025]).
22. Regarding Claim 15, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Giovanardi teaches the motion state of the vehicle is estimated based on sensor data received from one or more motion tracking sensor and/or rotation wheel speed sensors of the vehicle (Giovanardi: [0128] and [0129]).
23. Regarding Claim 16, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 15, and further, Giovanardi teaches the sensor data is received from an inertial measurement unit, IMU, and/or from a wheel speed sensor, WSS (Giovanardi: [0123]).
24. Regarding Claim 17, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Giovanardi teaches the condition of the road comprises at least one of a curvature of the road, an inclination of the road, a banking of the road, an anomaly of the road, and a smoothness of the road, wherein the anomaly of the road comprises at least one of a road bump, an undulation, a pothole and a manhole cover (Giovanardi: [0190]).
25. Regarding Claim 18, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Nickolaou teaches to adjust a regenerative braking force of the vehicle based on the estimated condition and/or adjust a steering, a suspension and/or a speed of the vehicle based on the estimated condition and/or adjust a speed profile based on the estimated condition (Nickolaou: [0038]).
26. Regarding Claim 19, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Giovanardi teaches to obtain second data indicative of a steering angle to estimate segmented data areas among the plurality of segmented data areas where the vehicle might travel and wherein estimating the condition of the road is further based on the estimated segmented areas (Giovanardi: [0071], [0128], and [0190] Note that the reference trajectory is equivalent to the steering angle to estimate segmented data areas where the vehicle might travel.).
27. Regarding Claim 20, Nickolaou and Giovanardi remain as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Nickolaou teaches a vehicle comprising the vehicle system according to claim 11 (Nickolaou: [0005]).
Response to Arguments
28. Applicant's arguments filed 5/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
29. First, the Applicant has alleged "Nickolaou does not obtain data at two different times during the same drive, nor does Nickolaou calculate a respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of previously obtained data points and a motion state of the vehicle." This argument is moot because Giovanardi (US 20220324421 A1) has been applied to teach these features (and the amended claim limitation).
30. Second, the Applicant has alleged that Giovanardi "refers to historical data collected from prior trips over the same road - not data obtained at two time points during the same drive."
The Examiner would like to point out that nowhere in the claims does it mention that the second plurality of data points are collected on the same drive as the first plurality of data points. The only indication is that the second plurality of data points represent the dimensions at a second time, wherein the first time is more recent that the second time. Therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the second time may be interpreted as a previous trip on the same road (reference data). The Applicant may amend to further clarify that the second time is on the same drive.
31. Third, the Applicant has alleged "Giovanardi uses this road profile data for vehicle localization - i.e., determining where the vehicle is located on a road segment - not for calculating a respective vertical position based on the vertical coordinates of previously obtained data points and a motion state of the vehicle to estimate road conditions ahead of the vehicle." The Examiner disagrees.
Giovanardi teaches in [0128] teaches that the road profile as a function of distance along a road segment may be obtained. This is equivalent to estimating a vertical position in each segmented data area because the road profile describes the vertical position of the road (and tires) along the road segment motion data. The road profile is determined based on measuring the vertical motion data, which is equivalent to the motion state of the vehicle. Additionally, the road profile is based on transformation of the time data to distance data and integrating the acceleration of a vehicle to determine vertical velocity, and integrating the velocity to determine the vertical height. The vertical height is equivalent to the vertical coordinates of the data points. Therefore, Giovanardi explains that the motion data is used to determine the vertical coordinates by performing calculations to describe the road profile as a function of distance along the road segment.
In addition, Giovanardi explains that the motion data is collected to characterize the road surface and generated as reference data when there is no profile data that exists. This is equivalent to the vertical coordinates of the second plurality of data points and the motion state at the second time.
As a result, Nickolaou and Giovanardi teach each and every limitation of the current claims.
32. Nickolaou (US 20110060478 A1) in view of Giovanardi (US 20220324421 A1) teaches all aspects of the invention. The rejection is modified according to the newly amended language but still maintained with the current prior art of record.
33. Claims 1-20 remain rejected under their respective grounds and rational as cited above, and as stated in the prior office action which is incorporated herein. Also, although not specifically argued, all remaining claims remain rejected under their respective grounds, rationales, and applicable prior art for these reasons cited above, and those mentioned in the prior office action which is incorporated herein.
Conclusion
34. 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.
35. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T SILVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tues: 7AM - 4:30PM ET; Wed-Thurs: 7AM-6PM ET; Fri: OFF.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/MICHAEL T SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights