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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites “wherein if a distance between the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined distance, a difference between heading angles of the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined angle, and a speed of the ego vehicle is less than a predetermined speed, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode”, but the bolded portion is grammatically incorrect and should read “the virtual lane generation mode is entered” or “the ego vehicle enters the virtual lane generation mode”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites “a calculating a weighting matrix for the lane” but should read “[[a]] calculating a weighting matrix for the lane”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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.
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.
Claims 1, 10-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim US20190337513A1.
Regarding claim 1,
Kim discloses:
A method for generating a virtual lane, comprising:
determining a lane recognition limit situation in which a lane in front of an ego vehicle is not recognized; (See at least Para. 0014, “ If the lane is not recognized, the route generation module may generate a virtual lane formed by extension of a legacy lane in consideration of a curvature based on finally-recognized lane information, and may generate a virtual route in a manner that the host vehicle travels in a center part of the generated virtual lane” and Para. 0026, “a method for allowing a route generation module to generate a virtual lane based on final lane recognition information in a lane disappearance section in which a lane is lost or washed away”. A lane recognition limit situation is determined in which a lane in front of an ego vehicle is not recognized.)
determining whether conditions for entering a virtual lane generation mode are satisfied in the lane recognition limit situation; if the conditions for entering the virtual lane generation mode are satisfied, entering the virtual lane generation mode; (See at least Fig. 5, wherein the virtual lane generation mode is entered if the conditions for entering the virtual lane recognition when the lane is not recognized is satisfied. For example, when the conditions are not satisfied, the method goes from S510 to S520, wherein the vehicle performs lane keeping control. When the conditions are satisfied, the method goes from S510 to S530 and S540, wherein a virtual lane generation mode is entered.)
processing previous lane information, (See at least Para. 0013, “lane information”)) information of the ego vehicle, (See at least Para. 0014, “ may generate a virtual route in a manner that the host vehicle travels in a center part of the generated virtual lane”) and information of a front vehicle (See at least Para. 0013, “preceding vehicle information”); generating the virtual lane based on the processed information; (See at least Para. 0011-0014, wherein the virtual lane is generated based on the processed information.)
and controlling the ego vehicle based on the generated virtual lane. (See at least Fig. 5, steps S550-S590, wherein the ego vehicle is controlled based on the generated virtual lane. Further see Claim 8, “generating a virtual lane if the lane is not detected such that the host vehicle travels in a center part of the virtual lane”. The vehicle is controlled to travel in a center part of the virtual lane when the lane is not detected.)
Regarding claim 10,
Kim discloses:
wherein the controlling of the ego vehicle comprises controlling driving of the ego vehicle using the generated virtual lane until lane recognition is resumed, and when the lane recognition is resumed, the ego vehicle is controlled based on an actually recognized lane. (See at least the process of Fig. 5. The driving of the vehicle uses the generated virtual lane, and then the process goes back to S510, wherein if the lane is recognized, the vehicle performs lane keeping control in step S520. Additionally, see Para. 0016.)
Regarding claim 11,
Kim discloses the same limitations as recited in claim 1 above, and is therefore rejected under the same rational.
Kim further discloses:
a first sensor configured to detect a lane in front of an ego vehicle and a front vehicle in front of the ego vehicle; a second sensor configured to detect body information of the ego vehicle; and a controller comprising at least one processor configured to process detection results of the first sensor and the second sensor, (See at least Para. 0035, “the lane and preceding vehicle sensor 11 may be implemented as any of various well-known sensors, such as a radar sensor, a Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) sensor, etc. The lane and preceding vehicle sensor 11 may include a plurality of sensors” and “such that the sensors of the lane and preceding vehicle sensor 11 may transmit the detected information to the ECU 2”. The first sensor is configured to detect a lane in front of an ego vehicle and a front vehicle, and a second sensor is configured to detect body information of the ego vehicle (See Para. 0036), and wherein the data is sent to the ECU 20 for processing.)
Regarding claim 12,
Kim discloses:
wherein the first sensor comprises at least one of a front camera, a front radar, or a corner radar. (See at least Para. 0035, wherein the first sensor comprises at least one front radar (i.e. a radar installed at a center part of the front surface of the vehicle).)
Regarding claim 20,
Kim discloses the same limitations as recited in claim 1 above, and is therefore rejected under the same rational.
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 (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.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Jeon US20180129854A1.
Regarding claim 2,
Kim discloses the limitations as recited in claim 1 above. Kim does not specifically state wherein the lane recognition limit situation in which the lane in front of the ego vehicle is not recognized is a situation in which the lane is not recognized because the lane is obscured by the front vehicle. However, Jeon teaches:
wherein the lane recognition limit situation in which the lane in front of the ego vehicle is not recognized is a situation in which the lane is not recognized because the lane is obscured by the front vehicle.
(See at least Para. 0043, “generate a virtual driving lane that is applied to control a vehicles for actions, such as, for example, lane keeping, lane changing, and speed adjustment of a host vehicle traveling when it is difficult to detect an accurate lane due to nearby vehicles obscuring a portion of the lane” and Para. 0007, “The feature line may include a traffic flow line formed by front nearby vehicles that are located in front of the host vehicle”. The lane recognition limit situation is a situation in which the lane is not recognized because the lane is obscure by the front vehicle.)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Jeon to include “wherein the lane recognition limit situation in which the lane in front of the ego vehicle is not recognized is a situation in which the lane is not recognized because the lane is obscured by the front vehicle” since “when it is difficult to detect an accurate lane due to nearby vehicles obscuring a portion of the lane, or when it is difficult to detect an accurate lane due to inclement weather conditions such as, for example, snow, rain, and fog, the lane detection of the host vehicle may be hindered. Thus, inaccurate lane detection may create a hazard in traveling” (Para. 0003, Jeon). Therefore, incorporating the teachings of Jeon would create a more accurate lane detection system, and for generating a more accurate virtual driving lane for the vehicle. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of Kim and Jeon. The claimed invention is merely a combination of known elements and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Jeon and Bang et al. US20210148724A1 (henceforth Bang).
Regarding claim 3,
Kim and Jeon discloses the limitations as recited in claims 1-2 above.
Kim does not specifically state wherein if a distance between the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined distance, a difference between heading angles of the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined angle, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode. However, Jeon teaches:
wherein if a distance between the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined distance, (See at least Fig. 5 and Para. 0067-0068, wherein a virtual lane is generated when the front vehicle obscures the visual field of the front-view capturing device, which is when the distance between the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined distance.) and a difference between heading angles of the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined angle it is entered the virtual lane generation mode (See at least Para. 0009-0010 and Para. 0071.).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Jeon to include “wherein if a distance between the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined distance, a difference between heading angles of the ego vehicle and the front vehicle is less than a predetermined angle, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode” since “when it is difficult to detect an accurate lane due to nearby vehicles obscuring a portion of the lane, or when it is difficult to detect an accurate lane due to inclement weather conditions such as, for example, snow, rain, and fog, the lane detection of the host vehicle may be hindered. Thus, inaccurate lane detection may create a hazard in traveling” (Para. 0003, Jeon). Therefore, incorporating the teachings of Jeon would create a more accurate lane detection system and would further make it more efficient to enter the virtual lane generation mode. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of Kim and Jeon. The claimed invention is merely a combination of known elements and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Kim does not specifically state wherein if the speed of the ego vehicle is less than a predetermined speed, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode.
However, Bang teaches:
wherein if the speed of the ego vehicle is less than a predetermined speed, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode. (See at least Para. 0021, “the processor may generate a route of the host vehicle based on an origin point of the host vehicle by using the radius of the vehicle moving route” and Para. 0103, “The virtual lane displaying apparatus 100 may calculate the radius R of the vehicle moving route based on a steering angle, a steering gear ratio, and a wheel base as in following Equation 6, when the vehicle speed is less than a threshold value.” When the speed is less than a threshold value, the radius R is calculated such that a route (i.e. including a lane) is generated (i.e. entering a virtual lane generation mode).)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Bang to include “wherein if the speed of the ego vehicle is less than a predetermined speed, it is entered the virtual lane generation mode” in order to “allow the driver of the following vehicle to safely drive the following vehicle based on the virtual lane information even if the visual field of the driver of the following vehicle is obstructed, and a method thereof” (Para. 0008). This would create a more robust system for generating a virtual lane. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of Kim and Bang. The claimed invention is merely a combination of known elements and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 13,
Kim, Jeon, and Bang discloses the limitations as recited in claim 3 above, and is therefore rejected under the same rejection and obviousness rational.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Jeon and Bang further in view of Zhou et al. US20250299499A1 (henceforth Zhou).
Regarding claim 4,
Kim, Jeon, and Bang discloses the limitations as recited in claim 1-3 above.
Kim does not specifically state wherein the processing of information comprises updating position information of the ego vehicle using a dead reckoning technique and performing coordinate transformation to use previous lane information for current position. However, Zhou teaches:
wherein the processing of information comprises updating position information of the ego vehicle using a dead reckoning technique and performing coordinate transformation to use previous lane information for current position
(See at least Para. 0066, “processor configured to determine an initial location of the vehicle, estimate a current location of the vehicle based on a dead reckoning process, detect, based on image data from the at least one image sensor, a lateral position of the vehicle within a lane of a road, and update the current location of the vehicle based on a difference between the estimated current location and the lateral position of the vehicle within the lane” and 0054, “ the method can include receiving image data in the image plane from one or more image sensors, projecting the image to the ground plane via a homograph transform, and determining lateral distances to the lane markers.” The processing of information comprises updating position information of the ego vehicle using a dead reckoning technique and performing coordinate transformation to use previous lane information for current position.)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Zhou to include “wherein the processing of information comprises updating position information of the ego vehicle using a dead reckoning technique and performing coordinate transformation to use previous lane information for current position” since “GPS technology may be inaccurate (due to a weak signal) or unavailable in urban areas due to the GPS signal being blocked by objects or buildings. Achieving an assisted or fully autonomous self-driving vehicle requires a system to determine the vehicle's lateral position within a lane of the roadway with precision even in the absence of a GPS signal” (Para. 0002, Zhou). This would further create a more robust and improved navigation system by using dead reckoning and lane information. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of Kim and Zhou. The claimed invention is merely a combination of known elements and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 14,
Kim, Jeon, Bang, and Zhou discloses the limitations as recited in claim 4 above, and is therefore rejected under the same rejection and obviousness rational.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Jeon, Bang, and Zhou further in view of Pandita et al. US20140005906A1 (henceforth Pandita).
Regarding claim 5,
Kim, Jeon, Bang, and Zhou discloses the limitations as recited in claim 1-4 above.
Kim does not specifically state wherein the processing of information further comprises estimating a predicted position of the front vehicle using an Extended Kalman Filter. However, Pandita teaches:
wherein the processing of information further comprises estimating a predicted position of the front vehicle using an Extended Kalman Filter.
(See at least Para. 0048, “An advantage of the prediction algorithm is that it works in real-world situations, where full-platoon measurement may be unavailable. An estimator is used for the unmeasured states, and in an example approach, a Kalman filter is used. Other estimation methods may be used. An unscented Kalman filter (UKF), was formulated to estimate the position and velocity states of vehicles in the platoon, using a platoon model as described above. The UKF is described in D. Simon, Optimal state estimation: Kalman, H.sub.infin. and nonlinear approaches.” The position of the front vehicle (i.e. vehicle 12 in the platoon) is estimated using an extended (i.e. nonlinear) Kalman filter.)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Pandita to include “wherein the processing of information further comprises estimating a predicted position of the front vehicle using an Extended Kalman Filter” since using a Kalman filter obtains “excellent results” (Para. 0007, Pandita) for prediction of platoon behavior. Therefore, it would create a more robust system for estimating the predicted position of the front vehicle, and therefore improve a navigation system that uses virtual lane generation. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of Kim and Pandita. The claimed invention is merely a combination of known elements and in combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 15,
Kim, Jeon, Bang, Zhou, and Pandita discloses the limitations as recited in claim 5 above, and is therefore rejected under the same rejection and obviousness rational.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9 and 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the claim discloses “wherein the generation of the virtual lane comprises: a calculating a weighting matrix for the lane and a weighting matrix for the front vehicle based on lane information according to a view range of the ego vehicle and position information according to the predicted position of the front vehicle; and optimizing lane coefficients based on the calculated weighting matrix for the lane and the weighting matrix for the front vehicle”. This claim and in combination with the previous claims is geared to generating the virtual lane by calculating a weighting matrix for the lane and a weighting matrix for the front vehicle based on lane information according to a view range of the ego vehicle and position information according to the predicted position of the front vehicle”. As recited in the previous claim, the predicted position of the front vehicle is determined using an extended Kalman filter, and therefore the generating of the virtual lane according to the weighting matrix by calculating a weighting matrix for the lane and a weighting matrix for the front vehicle based on lane information according to a view range of the ego vehicle and position information according to the predicted position of the front vehicle is very specific. Furthermore, claims 6 and 16 further require “optimizing lane coefficients based on the calculated weighting matrix for the lane and the weighting matrix for the front vehicle”. These limitations and in combination with the other elements in the claims are not anticipated nor made obvious by the prior art on record. Claims 7-9 and 17-19 are objected to for being dependent on objected claims 6 and 16. Since dependent claims 7-9 and 17-19 require the limitations of claims 6 and 16, then the same rational applies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Song US20250128706A1 discloses a processor configured to determine, based on sensing information transmitted from a plurality of sensors, a virtual road on which the vehicle is traveling; and control, based on the virtual road and a driving state of the vehicle, an operation of a lane following assist (LFA) function of the vehicle (See abstract).
Choe et al. US20200410260A1 discloses detecting or recognizing an actual lane, a virtual lane is determined based on the current state or motion prediction of an ADV. A virtual lane may or may not be identical or similar to the actual lane. A virtual lane may represent the likely movement of the ADV in a next time period given the current speed and heading direction of the vehicle. (See abstract)
Farooqi et al. US20190202453A1 discloses receiving sensed input from a vehicle sensor suite; using the input, providing a first output; determining that a vehicle-lane confidence level is less than a threshold; and then instead, providing a second output, wherein the first and second outputs comprise lane-correction data, wherein the second output is determined using an estimation filter. (See abstract).
Suzuki US20140152829A1 discloses a storing section in which a position of the recognized cruising lane-marker is stored, and a virtual cruising lane-marker setting means which sets a virtual cruising lane-marker, based on of a an archival record of the position of a cruising lane-marker which has been stored in the storing section, in a case where the cruising lane recognizing section cannot recognize the cruising lane-marker. (See abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL J LAMBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-4334. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 am- 6:00 pm MDT.
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, Erin Piateski can be reached at (571) 270-7429. 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.
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/G.J.L./
Examiner
Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights