DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This is the first Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and addressed below.
Priority
Request for priority to U.S. App. No. 17/302,486 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/18/2025 was filed before the mailing date of the present Office Action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: “RPM” should be fully defined prior to the use of an abbreviation. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0229657 to Herman et al. in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0329013 to Halmos.
Regarding claim 1, Herman et al. discloses:
A system comprising:
a sensing system (FIG. 1; Ref. Nos. 112, 112f, 112t) of an autonomous vehicle (AV) (FIG. 1; Ref. No. 105), the sensing system to:
determine a first spectral representation of vibrations of a vehicle, located in a driving environment of the AV, at a first time (¶ [0013] describing receiving transient velocity data of a vehicle and determine an operating condition of the second vehicle based on the transient velocity data; ¶ [0115] describing that the measurements were performed by a laser Doppler vibrometer; ¶ [0116] describing that after fast Fourier transform conversion into the frequency domain demonstrate that at specific vibration frequencies the radial velocity may be used to detect a change in the vehicle's state); and
a control system of the AV communicatively coupled to the sensing system (FIG. 1; Ref. No. 110), the control system to:
execute, responsive to at least identifying that the first spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to vibrations of an engine of the vehicle, a driving maneuver to change a driving path of the AV in the driving environment (¶ [0080] describing that the computer may further determine, based on the collected data, whether the object vehicle is stationary or moving; ¶ [0112] describing that the computer may adjust the travel path of the host vehicle travelling behind the object vehicle to slow down or move to a lane farther from object vehicle; ¶ [0029] describing predicting a trajectory of the second vehicle based on the determined operating condition of the second vehicle, and adjusting a travel path of the first vehicle based on the predicted trajectory of the second vehicle).
While Herman et al. does disclose the use of vibrational frequency to determine whether the vehicle is stationary or moving, Herman et al. does not expressly state that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary.
Halmos, in the same field of endeavor, teaches use of unique vibrational frequencies of a vehicle to determine whether the vehicle is idling (¶ [0030] describing vibration signatures and unique vibrational frequencies of target vehicles that are determined to be idling).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate determining that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary, as taught by Halmos, with a reasonable expectation of success in detecting small movements of targets, such as an idling vehicle (Halmos at ¶ [0030]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 1. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the sensing system of the AV comprises:
a photodetector to generate a signal representative of a frequency modulation of a light beam reflected from the vehicle, and wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations is determined based on the signal (¶ [0044] describing use of light detection and ranging (lidar) sensor(s), i.e. photodetector, to detect the vibrations; ¶ [0046] describing the sensors for detecting transient velocity such as frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) lidar, frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radar, and/or time-of-flight (TOF) cameras; ¶ [0115] describing that the measurements were performed by a laser Doppler vibrometer).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 2. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations is determined using a zero-crossing rate of the signal (Figure 9 depicting the zero-crossing transient velocity signal used to determine the first spectral representation of vibrations).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 3. Halmos further discloses:
wherein to determine the zero-crossing rate of the signal, the sensing system is to:
subtract a constant offset from the signal (Figure 3C depicting the offset 336 in determining the zero-crossing rate of the signal; ¶ [0060] describing the subtraction of the offset from the signal).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate subtracting an offset from the signal in determining the zero-crossing rate of the signal, as taught by Halmos, with a reasonable expectation of success in improving the achieved sensitivity achieved by spectrograms by producing a much more sensitive measurement of the vibration spectrum (Halmos at ¶ [0059]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 1. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the sensing system is further to:
determine a second spectral representation of vibrations of the vehicle at a second time that is later than the first time (¶ [0096] describing collecting more than one spectral representation of vibrations at different predetermined time periods, which includes at least a second time later than a first); and
identify that the second spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to a higher engine RPM than the first spectral representation of vibrations (¶ [0067] Table 1 depicting a higher RPM for a later detected signal; see also ¶ [0062] the sensors detect a change in the engine speed or RPMs).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 5. Herman et al., as modified by Halmos, further discloses:
wherein to execute the driving maneuver, the control system is to:
responsive to identifying that the first spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to the vibrations of the idling engine, cause the AV to perform a first modification of the driving path of the AV comprising at least one of:
decelerating the AV at a first rate, or
moving the AV laterally across a roadway (¶ [0112] describing that the computer may adjust the travel path of the host vehicle travelling behind the object vehicle to slow down or move to a lane farther from object vehicle based on the determination of the vibration frequencies representing an idle engine); and
responsive to identifying that the second spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to a higher engine RPM than the first spectral representation of vibrations, cause the AV to perform a second modification of the driving path of the AV (¶¶ [0110] – [0112] describing adjusting the travel path of the vehicle based on the determined operating conditions of the target vehicle based on the detected vibrations, which includes a second detected vibration being higher RPMs than a previous detected vibration. The vibrational detections are real-time updates to the travel path of the host vehicle and would include increasing speed, decreasing speed, changing lanes, etc., based on the different operating conditions depicted in Table 2. Specifically, Table 2 shows that one of the operating conditions is “Engine speed increased,” which would necessarily require a previously detected vibrational RPM less than the RPM detected to determine that the engine speed had increase from the previous detection, and based on that operating condition the vehicle would perform a different maneuver than the previous maneuver).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 6.
Neither Herman et al. nor Halmos expressly disclose wherein the second modification of the driving path of the AV comprises decelerating the AV at a second rate that is greater than the first rate.
However, Herman et al. does discloses braking as an adjustment to the travel path of the vehicle based on the RPMs of the target vehicle (¶¶ [0110] – [0112] describing adjusting the travel path of the vehicle based on the determined operating conditions of the target vehicle based on the detected vibrations, which includes a second detected vibration being higher RPMs than a previous detected vibration. The vibrational detections are real-time updates to the travel path of the host vehicle and would include increasing speed, decreasing speed, changing lanes, etc., based on the different operating conditions depicted in Table 2. Specifically, Table 2 shows that one of the operating conditions is “Engine speed increased,” which would necessarily require a previously detected vibrational RPM less than the RPM detected to determine that the engine speed had increase from the previous detection, and based on that operating condition the vehicle would perform a different maneuver than the previous maneuver. That maneuver includes braking, or deceleration of the vehicle based on the detected vibrational frequencies (¶ [0052] describing slowing down or stopping the vehicle in response to the detected vibration of the target vehicle); NOTE: The first rate of deceleration in claim 6 is recited in the alternative and, therefore, the recited second rate of claim 7 is satisfied by disclosure of a single rate because the first rate is not required).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate a vehicle path adjustment of braking at a second rate based on the teachings of Herman et al. with a reasonable expectation of success adjusting in real-time the travel path of the host vehicle is response to the changing operating conditions of the nearby target vehicle (Herman et al. at ¶¶ [0110] – [0112]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 1. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the control system is to execute the driving maneuver in further view of a distance from the AV to the vehicle (¶ [0111] describing executing driving maneuvers based on a predetermined distance from the object vehicle).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 1. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises a first frequency peak associated with an RPM of the idling engine (Figure 8 depicting multiple vibration frequency peaks associated with an RPM of an idling engine; see also ¶ [0115] describing the measured vibrational frequencies represented in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 9. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises one or more additional frequency peaks associated with multiples of the RPM of the idling engine (Figure 8 depicting multiple vibration frequency peaks associated with an RPM of an idling engine; see also ¶ [0115] describing the measured vibrational frequencies represented in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 11, Herman et al. discloses:
A method comprising:
determining, using a sensing system of an autonomous vehicle (AV), a first spectral representation of vibrations of a vehicle, located in a driving environment of the AV, at a first time (¶ [0013] describing using sensor to receive transient velocity data of a vehicle and determine an operating condition of the second vehicle based on the transient velocity data; ¶ [0115] describing that the measurements were performed by a laser Doppler vibrometer; ¶ [0116] describing that after fast Fourier transform conversion into the frequency domain demonstrate that at specific vibration frequencies the radial velocity may be used to detect a change in the vehicle's state); and
executing, responsive to at least identifying that the first spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to vibrations of an engine of the vehicle, a driving maneuver to a change a driving path of the AV in the driving environment (¶ [0080] describing that the computer may further determine, based on the collected data, whether the object vehicle is stationary or moving; ¶ [0112] describing that the computer may adjust the travel path of the host vehicle travelling behind the object vehicle to slow down or move to a lane farther from object vehicle; ¶ [0029] describing predicting a trajectory of the second vehicle based on the determined operating condition of the second vehicle, and adjusting a travel path of the first vehicle based on the predicted trajectory of the second vehicle).
While Herman et al. does disclose the use of vibrational frequency to determine whether the vehicle is stationary or moving, Herman et al. does not expressly state that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary.
Halmos, in the same field of endeavor, teaches use of unique vibrational frequencies of a vehicle to determine whether the vehicle is idling (¶ [0030] describing vibration signatures and unique vibrational frequencies of target vehicles that are determined to be idling).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate determining that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary, as taught by Halmos, with a reasonable expectation of success in detecting small movements of targets, such as an idling vehicle (Halmos at ¶ [0030]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 11. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein determining the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises:
generating, using a photodetector, a signal representative of a frequency modulation of a light beam reflected from the vehicle, and determining the first spectral representation of vibrations based on the signal (¶ [0044] describing use of light detection and ranging (lidar) sensor(s), i.e. photodetector, to detect the vibrations; ¶ [0046] describing the sensors for detecting transient velocity such as frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) lidar, frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radar, and/or time-of-flight (TOF) cameras; ¶ [0115] describing that the measurements were performed by a laser Doppler vibrometer).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 12. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein determining the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises:
determining a zero-crossing rate of the signal (Figure 9 depicting the zero-crossing transient velocity signal used to determine the first spectral representation of vibrations).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 11. Herman et al. further discloses:
further comprising:
determining a second spectral representation of vibrations of the vehicle at a second time that is later than the first time (¶ [0096] describing collecting more than one spectral representation of vibrations at different predetermined time periods, which includes at least a second time later than a first); and
identifying that the second spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to a higher engine RPM than the first spectral representation of vibrations (¶ [0067] Table 1 depicting a higher RPM for a later detected signal; see also ¶ [0062] the sensors detect a change in the engine speed or RPMs).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 14. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein executing the driving maneuver comprises:
causing, responsive to identifying that the first spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to the vibrations of the idling engine, the AV to perform a first modification of a driving path of the AV comprising at least one of:
decelerating the AV at a first rate, or
moving the AV laterally across a roadway (¶ [0112] describing that the computer may adjust the travel path of the host vehicle travelling behind the object vehicle to slow down or move to a lane farther from object vehicle based on the determination of the vibration frequencies representing an idle engine); and
causing, responsive to identifying that the second spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to a higher engine RPM than the first spectral representation of vibrations, the AV to perform a second modification of the driving path of the AV (¶¶ [0110] – [0112] describing adjusting the travel path of the vehicle based on the determined operating conditions of the target vehicle based on the detected vibrations, which includes a second detected vibration being higher RPMs than a previous detected vibration. The vibrational detections are real-time updates to the travel path of the host vehicle and would include increasing speed, decreasing speed, changing lanes, etc., based on the different operating conditions depicted in Table 2. Specifically, Table 2 shows that one of the operating conditions is “Engine speed increased,” which would necessarily require a previously detected vibrational RPM less than the RPM detected to determine that the engine speed had increase from the previous detection, and based on that operating condition the vehicle would perform a different maneuver than the previous maneuver).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 15.
Neither Herman et al. nor Halmos expressly disclose wherein the second modification of the driving path of the AV comprises decelerating the AV at a second rate that is greater than the first rate.
However, Herman et al. does discloses braking as an adjustment to the travel path of the vehicle based on the RPMs of the target vehicle (¶¶ [0110] – [0112] describing adjusting the travel path of the vehicle based on the determined operating conditions of the target vehicle based on the detected vibrations, which includes a second detected vibration being higher RPMs than a previous detected vibration. The vibrational detections are real-time updates to the travel path of the host vehicle and would include increasing speed, decreasing speed, changing lanes, etc., based on the different operating conditions depicted in Table 2. Specifically, Table 2 shows that one of the operating conditions is “Engine speed increased,” which would necessarily require a previously detected vibrational RPM less than the RPM detected to determine that the engine speed had increase from the previous detection, and based on that operating condition the vehicle would perform a different maneuver than the previous maneuver. That maneuver includes braking, or deceleration of the vehicle based on the detected vibrational frequencies (¶ [0052] describing slowing down or stopping the vehicle in response to the detected vibration of the target vehicle); NOTE: The first rate of deceleration in claim 6 is recited in the alternative and, therefore, the recited second rate of claim 7 is satisfied by disclosure of a single rate because the first rate is not required).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate a vehicle path adjustment of braking at a second rate based on the teachings of Herman et al. with a reasonable expectation of success adjusting in real-time the travel path of the host vehicle is response to the changing operating conditions of the nearby target vehicle (Herman et al. at ¶¶ [0110] – [0112]).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 11. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein executing the driving maneuver is in further view of a distance from the AV to the vehicle (¶ [0111] describing executing driving maneuvers based on a predetermined distance from the object vehicle).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 11. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises a first frequency peak associated with an RPM of the idling engine (Figure 8 depicting multiple vibration frequency peaks associated with an RPM of an idling engine; see also ¶ [0115] describing the measured vibrational frequencies represented in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Herman et al. and Halmos renders obvious all the limitations of claim 18. Herman et al. further discloses:
wherein the first spectral representation of vibrations comprises one or more additional frequency peaks associated with multiples of the RPM of the idling engine (Figure 8 depicting multiple vibration frequency peaks associated with an RPM of an idling engine; see also ¶ [0115] describing the measured vibrational frequencies represented in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 20, Herman et al. discloses:
An autonomous vehicle (AV) comprising:
a sensing system to:
determine a spectral representation of vibrations of a stationary vehicle, located in a driving environment of the AV, at a first time (¶ [0013] describing receiving transient velocity data of a vehicle and determine an operating condition of the second vehicle based on the transient velocity data; ¶ [0115] describing that the measurements were performed by a laser Doppler vibrometer; ¶ [0116] describing that after fast Fourier transform conversion into the frequency domain demonstrate that at specific vibration frequencies the radial velocity may be used to detect a change in the vehicle's state); and
a control system (Figure 1, Ref. No. 110) communicatively coupled to the sensing system, the control system to:
execute, responsive to at least identifying that the spectral representation of vibrations corresponds to vibrations of an idling engine of the stationary vehicle, a driving maneuver to change a driving path of the autonomous vehicle in the driving environment (¶ [0080] describing that the computer may further determine, based on the collected data, whether the object vehicle is stationary or moving; ¶ [0112] describing that the computer may adjust the travel path of the host vehicle travelling behind the object vehicle to slow down or move to a lane farther from object vehicle; ¶ [0029] describing predicting a trajectory of the second vehicle based on the determined operating condition of the second vehicle, and adjusting a travel path of the first vehicle based on the predicted trajectory of the second vehicle).
While Herman et al. does disclose the use of vibrational frequency to determine whether the vehicle is stationary or moving, Herman et al. does not expressly state that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary.
Halmos, in the same field of endeavor, teaches use of unique vibrational frequencies of a vehicle to determine whether the vehicle is idling (¶ [0030] describing vibration signatures and unique vibrational frequencies of target vehicles that are determined to be idling).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Herman et al.’s invention to incorporate determining that the vehicle is idling when determined to be stationary, as taught by Halmos, with a reasonable expectation of success in detecting small movements of targets, such as an idling vehicle (Halmos at ¶ [0030]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0033366 to Liu et al. teaches use of vibrational frequency to determine whether a vehicle is idling or moving (See Figure 3B and the description thereof).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D HOLMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm ET.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. 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.
/JDH/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
3/6/26