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(s) 1 - 20 is pending for examination.
This Action is made FINAL.
This Office Action is in response to Applicant Amendment and Arguments filed on 6/2/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the previous rejection of claims 1 - 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant has not amended in the manner discussed during the interview. The amendment discussed in the interview was the updated first parameter and updated second parameters are updated from the maximum first and second parameters (not that the maximum parameters themselves are updated). However as recited in the current claim set, updating the maximum parameters to determine updated parameters can be interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation as the updated parameters are replacing the maximum parameters. Additionally, it does not appear applicant has support for this amendment in the specification.
Additionally applicant has stated a terminal disclaimer has been filed, but no terminal disclaimer has been received.
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 1-20 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.
In independent claims 1, 10, and 15 the limitation “updating, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value” does not appear to have support in the specification. The specification discusses updating an output but not maximum parameters.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim(s) 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-3, 10, and 14-16 of Patent. No. 12195046 in view of Liu et al (US 20220089184 A1).
Table has been created below to compare claims of the instant application and claims of Patent. No. 12195046 side by side.
Instant Application 18/969,041
Patent. No. 12195046
1. A method comprising: determining a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value corresponding to an autonomous vehicle (AV) for traveling a route; updating, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value corresponding to the AV for traveling the route; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value.
updating, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
Lui teaches
Para [0102-0111] and equation 1a-1c discusses calculating center of gravity based on loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle
Para [0112-0115] and equation 2 discusses determining a maximum acceleration based on the center of gravity
Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Where the final maximum acceleration is based on the loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value are without taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV; and the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value are taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein: the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value without taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV; and the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the determining of the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value comprises: identifying mass distribution data of the AV, wherein the mass distribution data comprises the first load value and the second load value; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, the route from a starting location to a destination location; and determining an output corresponding to the AV traveling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value.
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the determining of the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value comprises: determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; and determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value, wherein the causing of the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value is associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more handling maneuver limits are further determined based on one or more of: a vertical center of gravity (COG) of a trailer of the AV; a lateral COG of the trailer of the AV; a longitudinal COG of the trailer of the AV; moment of inertia data of the AV; or roll stiffness data of the AV.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more handling maneuver limits are further determined based on one or more of: a vertical center of gravity (COG) of a trailer of the AV; a lateral COG of the trailer of the AV; or a longitudinal COG of the trailer of the AV.
8. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more handling maneuver limits comprises: type of braking of the AV; acceleration limits of the AV; jerk limits of the AV; yaw rate limits of the AV; type of evasive maneuvers of the AV; lane selection of the AV; or turning limits of the AV.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more handling maneuver limits comprises: type of braking of the AV; acceleration limits of the AV; jerk limits of the AV; yaw rate limits of the AV; type of evasive maneuvers of the AV; lane selection of the AV; or turning limits of the AV.
9. The method of claim 6, wherein at least one of: the first load value is a first mass value associated with the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value is a second mass value associated with the second distal end of the first axle; or the one or more handling maneuver limits are further determined based on a ratio of the first load value to the second load value.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of: the first load value is a first mass value associated with the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value is a second mass value associated with the second distal end of the first axle; or the one or more handling maneuver limits are further determined based on a ratio of the first load value to the second load value.
10. A system comprising: a memory device; and a processing device, coupled to the memory device, wherein the processing device is to: determine a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value corresponding to an autonomous vehicle (AV) for traveling a route ; update, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value corresponding to the AV for traveling the route; and cause the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value.
update, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
Lui teaches
Para [0102-0111] and equation 1a-1c discusses calculating center of gravity based on loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle
Para [0112-0115] and equation 2 discusses determining a maximum acceleration based on the center of gravity
Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Where the final maximum acceleration is based on the loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value are without taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV; and the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value are taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein: the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value without taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV; and the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV.
12. The system of claim 10, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
13. The system of claim 12, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
14. The system of claim 10, wherein to determine the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value, the processing device is to: identify mass distribution data of the AV, wherein the mass distribution data comprises the first load value and the second load value; select, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, the route from a starting location to a destination location; and determine an output corresponding to the AV traveling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value.
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
15. The system of claim 14, wherein to determine the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value, the processing device is to: determine, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; and determine, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value, wherein causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value is associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
16. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to: determine a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value corresponding to an autonomous vehicle (AV) for traveling a route ; update, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value corresponding to the AV for traveling the route; and cause the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value.
update, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
Lui teaches
Para [0102-0111] and equation 1a-1c discusses calculating center of gravity based on loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle
Para [0112-0115] and equation 2 discusses determining a maximum acceleration based on the center of gravity
Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Where the final maximum acceleration is based on the loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value are without taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV; and the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value are taking into account the first load value and the second load value of the AV.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein: the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value without taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV; and the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value taking into account the mass distribution data of the AV.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein: the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values; and the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 18, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein: the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes; and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
20. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein to determine the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value, the processing device is to: identify mass distribution data of the AV, wherein the mass distribution data comprises the first load value and the second load value; select, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, the route from a starting location to a destination location; and determine an output corresponding to the AV traveling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value.
1. A method comprising: identifying mass distribution data of an autonomous vehicle (AV), wherein the mass distribution data comprises a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle of the AV; selecting, based on the mass distribution data and road map data, a route from a starting location to a destination location; determining an output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises a maximum first parameter value and a maximum second parameter value; determining, based on the first load value at the first distal end of the first axle and the second load value at the second distal end of the first axle, one or more handling maneuver limits for the AV to travel the route; determining, based on the one or more handling maneuver limits, an updated output corresponding to the AV travelling the route, wherein the updated output corresponding to the AV traveling the route comprises an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value; and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value and the updated second parameter value associated with the one or more handling maneuver limits.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both inventions are directed to controlling a vehicle based on load values of the vehicle. Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected based on claim(s) 1-3, 10, and 14-16 of Patent. No. 12195046. Minor differences can be seen and noted in the table above, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method of Patent. No. 12195046 in view of Liu to produce the method, system, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of the instant application because determining a final maximum acceleration as the calculated maximum rather than the rated maximum improves safety para [0117] “In the foregoing steps, by taking the acceleration at which the vehicle is in a critical state of overturning during deceleration as the maximum acceleration, the weight of the vehicle itself and/or load of the vehicle can be taken into consideration to avoid obstacles, which greatly improves safety.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy (US 20110022267 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 20220089184 A1, hereinafter known as Liu).
Regarding claim 1, Murphy teaches A method comprising: determining a maximum first parameter value
{Para [0071] “In object 1720 the processor uses the information obtained in objects 1705, 1710, and 1715, as available, to calculate the current static and dynamic stability indices, S.sub.stat and S.sub.dyn, described above. If either of these indices is less than a threshold value, the autopilot issues a warning to the tractor operator. The warning may be an aural warning such as a bell or horn, or a visual warning such as a red light or warning message on a display. The threshold value for current stability indices is typically about 10 but may be anywhere between about 5 and about 50 based on operator preferences.”
Where the threshold can be considered a maximum parameter value.
}
determining, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle,
{Para [0042-0043] “The CG height can also be determined from tire pressure measurements as shown in FIG. 7. These measurements may be used to determine CG height directly or to find changes in CG from a known starting position. FIG. 7 shows a rear view of tractor 705 on slope 710. The location of the CG is marked with circle inscribed with a cross 715. The slope angle .theta. is the angle between vertical 720 and tractor z-axis 725. The pressures in the uphill and downhill rear tires are p.sub.1 and p.sub.2, respectively.
Angle .theta. is measured by the tractor's roll angle sensors while pressures p.sub.1 and p.sub.2 are measured by pressure sensors in each tire. Appropriate pressure sensors include MEMS pressure sensors mounted in tire valve stems. Such sensors may send pressure data wirelessly. The difference in tire pressure, p.sub.1-p.sub.2, for a given roll angle depends on CG height. At a given roll angle, p.sub.1-p.sub.2 is greater when the CG is higher, i.e. farther away from the slope. Total tractor weight, tire footprint, level (.theta.=0) tire pressure differential, distance between tires and other data are used to complete the calculation.”
Where the vehicle is an AV
Para [0031] “A tractor may also be driven by a human operator but guided by an autopilot; i.e. the human operator executes commands issued by the autopilot. Throughout this disclosure systems and methods are applicable to both autopilot-driven and autopilot-guided operations. Further, the systems and methods are not restricted to tractors; they are also applicable to a wide range of agricultural vehicles and other vehicles.”
Para [0062-0069] where the CG height calculated by using the wheel pressure (wheel loads) is used in the equation found after para [0067] which is part of the calculation used to determine a dynamic stability index which can be considered as a updated first parameter value
Para [0070-0075] states that the stability index is given a threshold before a warning or correction corrective action by the autopilot system is taken and thus it can be said that handling maneuver limits are being determined by the CG of the vehicle which is determined by the wheel loads.
}
and causing the AV to travel the route based on the updated first parameter value
{Para [0034] “In the future, human operators may not be present in every tractor. Fleets of tractors may operate in formation with a human present in only the lead tractor, for example. Or single tractors may be controlled remotely. Whether or not a human is present, an autopilot driving a tractor must be aware of rollover risk. The autopilot may provide a rollover warning to a local operator (e.g. tractor driver), a remote operator (e.g. a person monitoring an autonomous tractor from a remote location), or both. In this application "operator" may refer to either a local or a remote operator. In addition to, or instead of, providing a warning the autopilot may take preventive action when present or future rollover risk exceeds an acceptable threshold. For example, based on a planned path of operation the autopilot may reduce the speed of tractor when reaching high-risk terrain or a high-risk maneuver. The autopilot may also change the planned path, or suggest such changes to an operator, in order to reduce rollover risk.”
Para [0070-0075] states that the stability index is given a threshold before a warning or correction corrective action by the autopilot system is taken and thus it can be said that handling maneuver limits are being determined by the CG of the vehicle which is determined by the wheel loads.
}
Murphy does not teach, a maximum second parameter value and an updated second parameter value.
However, Liu teaches determining
{Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
The rated acceleration can be considered as a maximum second parameter value it should be noted that this a braking acceleration as shown by para [0113]
}
updating, based on a first load value at a first distal end of a first axle of the AV and a second load value at a second distal end of the first axle, the maximum first parameter value and the maximum second parameter value to determine an updated first parameter value and an updated second parameter value corresponding to the AV for traveling the route;
{Para [0102-0111] and equation 1a-1c discusses calculating center of gravity based on loads at the 4 corners of the vehicle
Para [0112-0115] and equation 2 discusses determining a maximum acceleration based on the center of gravity
Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
The maximum acceleration can be considered as a maximum second parameter value it should be noted that this a braking acceleration as shown by para [0117]
Murphy already teaches the first set of parameters specifically
}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Murphy to incorporate the teachings of Liu to have use a maximum second parameter and a second updated parameter corresponding to longitudinal acceleration and to update the rated acceleration with a numerically calculated value because as discussed in para [0117] “In the foregoing steps, by taking the acceleration at which the vehicle is in a critical state of overturning during deceleration as the maximum acceleration, the weight of the vehicle itself and/or load of the vehicle can be taken into consideration to avoid obstacles, which greatly improves safety.”
Regarding Claim 2, Murphy in view of Liu teaches The method of claim 1. Murphy further teaches the maximum first parameter value
{ Para [0071] “In object 1720 the processor uses the information obtained in objects 1705, 1710, and 1715, as available, to calculate the current static and dynamic stability indices, S.sub.stat and S.sub.dyn, described above. If either of these indices is less than a threshold value, the autopilot issues a warning to the tractor operator. The warning may be an aural warning such as a bell or horn, or a visual warning such as a red light or warning message on a display. The threshold value for current stability indices is typically about 10 but may be anywhere between about 5 and about 50 based on operator preferences.”
Where the threshold can be considered a maximum parameter value and is not based off a calculation. The dynamic index however are based off center of gravity.
}
Liu further teaches
{Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Where rated acceleration is a characteristic of the vehicle not determined by current vehicle mass (it’s a specification), and maximum acceleration as discussed in the claim 1 rejection is calculated using center of gravity.
}
Regarding Claim 3, Murphy in view of Liu teaches The method of claim 1. Murphy further teaches the maximum first parameter value and the updated first parameter value correspond to lateral acceleration values;
{ Para [0071] “In object 1720 the processor uses the information obtained in objects 1705, 1710, and 1715, as available, to calculate the current static and dynamic stability indices, S.sub.stat and S.sub.dyn, described above. If either of these indices is less than a threshold value, the autopilot issues a warning to the tractor operator. The warning may be an aural warning such as a bell or horn, or a visual warning such as a red light or warning message on a display. The threshold value for current stability indices is typically about 10 but may be anywhere between about 5 and about 50 based on operator preferences.”
Para [0062-0069] where the CG height calculated by using the wheel pressure (wheel loads) is used in the equation found after para [0067] which is part of the calculation used to determine a dynamic stability index which can be considered as a updated second parameter value. As shown in the equations after para [0066] and para [0067] the radius of the turn and the tangential velocity are used to calculate the dynamic stability index which is ultimately a measure of the vehicle rolling over due to centrifugal force. Thus the dynamic stability index and the threshold can be said to correspond to lateral acceleration values.
}
Liu further teaches the maximum second parameter value and the updated second parameter value correspond to longitudinal acceleration values.
{Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Para [0113] “S41: determining an acceleration at which the vehicle is in a critical state of overturning during deceleration as the maximum acceleration, according to the center-of-gravity position. Generally, in a case that the vehicle is used for loading, or the weight of loaded goods is much greater than the vehicle body weight, the vehicle is likely to overturn in a case that the vehicle decelerates. Therefore, the overturning in the step S41 also considers the load of the vehicle.”
The rated acceleration and maximum acceleration are braking accelerations which can be considered a longitudinal acceleration.
}
Regarding Claim 4, Murphy in view of Liu teaches The method of claim 3. Murphy further teaches the lateral acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration to a side, turning, cornering, evasive maneuver, or changing lanes;
{ Para [0071] “In object 1720 the processor uses the information obtained in objects 1705, 1710, and 1715, as available, to calculate the current static and dynamic stability indices, S.sub.stat and S.sub.dyn, described above. If either of these indices is less than a threshold value, the autopilot issues a warning to the tractor operator. The warning may be an aural warning such as a bell or horn, or a visual warning such as a red light or warning message on a display. The threshold value for current stability indices is typically about 10 but may be anywhere between about 5 and about 50 based on operator preferences.”
Para [0062-0069] where the CG height calculated by using the wheel pressure (wheel loads) is used in the equation found after para [0067] which is part of the calculation used to determine a dynamic stability index which can be considered as a updated second parameter value. As shown in the equations after para [0066] and para [0067] the radius of the turn and the tangential velocity are used to calculate the dynamic stability index which is ultimately a measure of the vehicle rolling over due to centrifugal force. Thus the dynamic stability index and the threshold can be said to correspond to lateral acceleration values.
}
Liu further teaches and the longitudinal acceleration values correspond to one or more of acceleration within a lane, acceleration towards a front of the AV, or adjusting speed without turning.
{Para [0116] “S42: comparing a numerical value of the maximum acceleration with a numerical value of a rated acceleration a.sub.w of the vehicle, and taking a smaller value min (a.sub.max, a.sub.w) as a final maximum acceleration.”
Para [0113] “S41: determining an acceleration at which the vehicle is in a critical state of overturning during deceleration as the maximum acceleration, according to the center-of-gravity position. Generally, in a case that the vehicle is used for loading, or the weight of loaded goods is much greater than the vehicle body weight, the vehicle is likely to overturn in a case that the vehicle decelerates. Therefore, the overturning in the step S41 also considers the load of the vehicle.”
Where rated acceleration is a characteristic of the vehicle not determined by current mass, and maximum acceleration as discussed in the claim 1 rejection is calculated using center of gravity.
}
Regarding claim 10, it recites A system having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Additionally Murphy teaches A system comprising: a memory device; and a processing device, coupled to the memory device, wherein the processing device is to:
{abstract “A rollover risk assessment system includes sensors and a processor for estimating rollover risk associated with maneuvering on varying terrain.”
Para [0037] “Optional radio/cell phone 415 transmits voice and/or data to a base station. Display, 3-D map and path processor 420 includes a microprocessor, volatile and non-volatile memory, and input/output devices including buttons, trackballs, speakers, USB ports, etc. Pitch, roll and yaw sensors 425 may be MEMS based or use other technologies, and may include both orientation (pitch, roll, yaw) and rate (pitch rate, roll rate, yaw rate) sensors. Accelerometers 430 may be MEMS based or use other technologies. Steering sensor and steering control 435 monitors wheel angle information and controls hydraulic steering valves. Optional weight sensor 440 measures the tractor's total weight. The weight sensor may use tire pressure measurements or rely on sensors in wheel hubs or use other technologies. Optional throttle sensor and throttle control 445 measures throttle position and opens and closes the throttle as needed to control tractor speed. The throttle control may also control a continuously variable transmission. Steering, weight, throttle and other sense and/or control functions may be implemented via a data bus, such as an ISO 11783 bus, for example.”
}
Regarding claim 11, it recites A system having limitations similar to those of claim 2 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 12, it recites A system having limitations similar to those of claim 3 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 13, it recites A system having limitations similar to those of claim 4 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 16, it recites A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Additionally Murphy teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to:
{abstract “A rollover risk assessment system includes sensors and a processor for estimating rollover risk associated with maneuvering on varying terrain.”
Para [0037] “Optional radio/cell phone 415 transmits voice and/or data to a base station. Display, 3-D map and path processor 420 includes a microprocessor, volatile and non-volatile memory, and input/output devices including buttons, trackballs, speakers, USB ports, etc. Pitch, roll and yaw sensors 425 may be MEMS based or use other technologies, and may include both orientation (pitch, roll, yaw) and rate (pitch rate, roll rate, yaw rate) sensors. Accelerometers 430 may be MEMS based or use other technologies. Steering sensor and steering control 435 monitors wheel angle information and controls hydraulic steering valves. Optional weight sensor 440 measures the tractor's total weight. The weight sensor may use tire pressure measurements or rely on sensors in wheel hubs or use other technologies. Optional throttle sensor and throttle control 445 measures throttle position and opens and closes the throttle as needed to control tractor speed. The throttle control may also control a continuously variable transmission. Steering, weight, throttle and other sense and/or control functions may be implemented via a data bus, such as an ISO 11783 bus, for example.”
}
Regarding claim 17, it recites A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to those of claim 2 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 18, it recites A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to those of claim 3 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 19, it recites A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to those of claim 4 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5-9, 14-15, and 20 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 and the Double patenting rejection is overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Olsen et al. (US 20210046926 A1) teaches in the abstract “The present disclosure is directed to performing one or more validity checks on potential trajectories for a device, such as an autonomous vehicle, to navigate. In some examples, a potential trajectory may be validated based on whether it is consistent with a current trajectory the vehicle is navigating such that the potential and current trajectories are not too different, whether the vehicle can feasibly or kinematically navigate to the potential trajectory from a current state, whether the potential trajectory was punctual or received within a time period of a prior trajectory, and/or whether the potential trajectory passes a staleness check, such that it was created within a certain time period. In some examples, determining whether a potential trajectory is feasibly may include updating a set of feasibility limits based on one or more operational characteristics of statuses of subsystems of the vehicle.”
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 ALEXANDER MATTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4296. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, James Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. 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.
/A.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/BRIAN P SWEENEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights