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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Priority is being given to 07/15/2022.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendments filed on 07/23/2026.
Claims 1-7 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 7 are currently amended.
Claims 1-7 are currently rejected.
This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 112 rejections, in light of the amendments these rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with regards to the art rejections have been considered and are not persuasive. The applicant argues that there is no motivation to combine Amla with Yonushonis. Applicant additionally argues that Yonushonis is deficient in teaching the receiving the displacement info step. Amla teaches the ability to receive vehicle info when out of line of sight to allow for the vehicle to continue to follow. It does not teach that the data used to follow is displacement data of the vehicle to use to estimate the location of the vehicle when obstructed. Yonushonis teaches the ability to determine the claimed displacement data and uses it to estimate the location of an obstructed vehicle. Although Yonushonis only uses this data to provide warnings to a driver, this same data can be substituted into Amla to allow Amla to control the vehicle based off the identified position and the displacement info as claimed. This is obvious as applying simple substitution of a known technique to achieve an expected result. The motivation to combine is proper as well due to being in the same field of endeavor of vehicle tracking/monitoring and by the KSR rationale mentions supra. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). Therefore applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are being maintained.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amla et. al. (US 2017/0168503), herein Amla and Yonushonis et. al. (US 11,772,673), herein Yonushonis.
Regarding claim 1:
Amla teaches:
A moving body (fig. 3, follow vehicle 221) that follows a preceding moving body (fig. 3, lead vehicle 201), the moving body comprising:
a position calculator (fig. 1, a computing unit (or electronic controller) 124) that identifies a position of the preceding moving body based on an output value (a follow vehicle it may be more advantageous to have certain forward-facing sensors for determining the position or other attributes of the lead vehicle [0038]) from a sensor that acquires information around the moving body (sensors 108 or 128 may include radar, lidar, sonar, optical distance, alignment, laser, GPS, Doppler, infrared, ultraviolet, audio, various RF, acceleration, deceleration, engine heat, gyroscopic, magnetic, microphone, and other sensors both discussed herein and not discussed herein but known in the art [0041]);
a receiver (fig. 1, wireless receiver 122a) that receives displacement information (Computing unit 104 may process some or all of the received information and determine which information and commands to send to vehicle 120 or another vehicle via wireless transmitter 102b. Wireless transmitter 102b then transmits a transmission intended for receipt by at least wireless receiver 122a [0042])
an operation controller (fig. 1, a steering and powertrain control unit (or momentum control system) 127) that performs control to move the moving body (In vehicle 120, information sensed by sensors 128, inputs from sensors 123, feedback from control unit 127 and guidance transmissions including information and commands received by wireless receiver 122a may be transmitted to computing unit 124. Computing unit (or electronic controller) 124 may process some or all of the received information and determine which commands to output to control unit 127 in the form of control data to control the vehicle 120 [0043]) based on the position of the preceding moving body identified by the position calculator (Sensors 308 and 328 are each configured to sense an input and provide information that is relevant to the ability of the follow vehicle 221 to follow lead vehicle 201 [0051])
Amla teaches the ability to coordinate control via wireless communication when out of line of sight but does not explicitly teach that the information shared is displacement information although shared locations of each vehicle would be expected for coordinated control.
Amla does not explicitly teach, however Yonushonis teaches:
a receiver that receives displacement information (collecting, via at least one wireless communications network, movement data pertaining to each subsystem in a plurality of subsystems, wherein the plurality of subsystems comprises at least one slow-moving subsystem and/or at least one fast-moving subsystem categorized as such based at least in part on a capability for fast movement, a current movement characteristic, and/or recent movement characteristic [claim 1]; With respect to the movement data collected at step 802, that data could reflect one or more of position, positional accuracy, location, latitude, longitude, elevation, speed, acceleration, trajectory, transmission state, heading, steering-wheel angle, vehicle type, vehicle size, surface coefficient of friction, weather, temperature, precipitation, recent degree of active status of a traction-control system, recent degree of active status of an antilock braking system (ABS), and exterior-lights status [col 13, lines 41-49]) indicating a position displacement amount of the preceding moving body due to movement of the preceding moving body (The MDM 510 may receive movement vectors and/or other movement data from and/or reflective of the movement of one or more subsystems [col 9, lines 50-52]); and
the displacement information in a state of losing sight in which the position calculator cannot identify the position of the preceding moving body (a compromised line of sight in which there is an intervening subsystem physically obstructing a line of sight to an otherwise unobstructed line of sight to another subsystem so as to block sight of the another subsystem [claim 1]; With respect to condition 804B—i.e., that at least one of the subsystems in the identified subset has at least one current movement anomaly, examples of current movement anomalies include … a compromised line of sight [col 14, lines 45-67]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amla to include the teachings as taught by Yonushonis with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of tracking multiple vehicles locations. Yonushonis teaches the benefits of “safety warnings are triggered by one or more of what are referred to herein as computing-and-communication systems (CCSs) detecting the occurrence, presence, and/or the like of one or more of what are referred to herein as warning-triggering conditions (e.g., states of one or more measured parameters, one or more occurrences of one or more events, and/or the like), and responsively issuing one or more safety warnings. In various different embodiments, the issuing of a given safety warning takes the form of one or more CCSs transmitting one or more warning messages to one or more other CCSs, one or more CCSs presenting (e.g., visually, audibly, tactilely, and/or the like) one or more safety-warning indications, and/or one or more CCSs taking one or more other suitable warning-related actions. [Yonushonis, col 1, lines 50-63]”. Applying the vehicle tracking when out of line of sight of Yonushonis is obvious by simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result. Amla teaches the ability to track the location of a vehicle while out of line of sight by using wireless communication to allow for the vehicles to share their data with each other. Yonushonis teaches the ability to track a vehicle while visible and estimating its location when line of sight is lost. Both methods achieve the same result of tracking a vehicle that is not within a visible line of sight however Yonushonis does not require the other vehicle to have the required equipment to gather and transmit its own data and can work on more objects than just other vehicles allowing the system of Yonushonis to be more robust and less prone to wireless interference.
Regarding claim 6:
Amla in view of Yonushonis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Amla further teaches:
wherein the operation controller performs control to reduce a speed of the moving body and move the moving body when transition is made to the state of losing sight (vehicle 221 may be directed by its controller to slow to a lower rate of travel or stop at a safe distance from obstacle 694 until vehicle 695 and any other oncoming vehicles that pose a threat have safely passed vehicle 221).
Regarding claim 7:
Amla teaches:
A moving body system (fig. 3, lead vehicle 201 and follow vehicle 221) comprising:
a preceding first moving body (fig. 3, lead vehicle 201); and
a second moving body that follows the first moving body (fig. 3, follow vehicle 221),
wherein the first moving body transmits displacement information indicating a position displacement amount of the first moving body per unit time to the second moving body (lead vehicle 201 wirelessly transmits information regarding its movement, position, attitude, and/or sensed surroundings or circumstances to one or more follow vehicles and may wirelessly receive data regarding the same or similar information from one or several follow vehicles [0072]), and
the second moving body includes:
a position calculator (fig. 1, a computing unit (or electronic controller) 124) that identifies a position of the first moving body based on an output value (a follow vehicle it may be more advantageous to have certain forward-facing sensors for determining the position or other attributes of the lead vehicle [0038]) from a sensor that acquires information around the second moving body (sensors 108 or 128 may include radar, lidar, sonar, optical distance, alignment, laser, GPS, Doppler, infrared, ultraviolet, audio, various RF, acceleration, deceleration, engine heat, gyroscopic, magnetic, microphone, and other sensors both discussed herein and not discussed herein but known in the art [0041]);
a receiver (fig. 1, wireless receiver 122a) that receives the displacement information from the first moving body (Computing unit 104 may process some or all of the received information and determine which information and commands to send to vehicle 120 or another vehicle via wireless transmitter 102b. Wireless transmitter 102b then transmits a transmission intended for receipt by at least wireless receiver 122a [0042]); and
an operation controller (fig. 1, a steering and powertrain control unit (or momentum control system) 127) that performs control to move the first moving body (In vehicle 120, information sensed by sensors 128, inputs from sensors 123, feedback from control unit 127 and guidance transmissions including information and commands received by wireless receiver 122a may be transmitted to computing unit 124. Computing unit (or electronic controller) 124 may process some or all of the received information and determine which commands to output to control unit 127 in the form of control data to control the vehicle 120 [0043]) based on the position of the first moving body identified by the position calculator (Sensors 308 and 328 are each configured to sense an input and provide information that is relevant to the ability of the follow vehicle 221 to follow lead vehicle 201 [0051]) and the displacement information in a state of losing sight where the position calculator cannot identify the position of the first moving body.
Amla teaches the ability to coordinate control via wireless communication when out of line of sight but does not explicitly teach that the information shared is displacement information although shared locations of each vehicle would be expected for coordinated control.
Amla does not explicitly teach, however Yonushonis teaches:
a receiver that receives displacement information (collecting, via at least one wireless communications network, movement data pertaining to each subsystem in a plurality of subsystems, wherein the plurality of subsystems comprises at least one slow-moving subsystem and/or at least one fast-moving subsystem categorized as such based at least in part on a capability for fast movement, a current movement characteristic, and/or recent movement characteristic [claim 1]; With respect to the movement data collected at step 802, that data could reflect one or more of position, positional accuracy, location, latitude, longitude, elevation, speed, acceleration, trajectory, transmission state, heading, steering-wheel angle, vehicle type, vehicle size, surface coefficient of friction, weather, temperature, precipitation, recent degree of active status of a traction-control system, recent degree of active status of an antilock braking system (ABS), and exterior-lights status [col 13, lines 41-49]) indicating a displacement amount of a position of the preceding moving body due to movement of the preceding moving body (The MDM 510 may receive movement vectors and/or other movement data from and/or reflective of the movement of one or more subsystems [col 9, lines 50-52]); and
the displacement information in a state of losing sight in which the position calculator cannot identify the position of the first moving body (a compromised line of sight in which there is an intervening subsystem physically obstructing a line of sight to an otherwise unobstructed line of sight to another subsystem so as to block sight of the another subsystem [claim 1]; With respect to condition 804B—i.e., that at least one of the subsystems in the identified subset has at least one current movement anomaly, examples of current movement anomalies include … a compromised line of sight [col 14, lines 45-67]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amla to include the teachings as taught by Yonushonis with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of tracking multiple vehicles locations. Yonushonis teaches the benefits of “safety warnings are triggered by one or more of what are referred to herein as computing-and-communication systems (CCSs) detecting the occurrence, presence, and/or the like of one or more of what are referred to herein as warning-triggering conditions (e.g., states of one or more measured parameters, one or more occurrences of one or more events, and/or the like), and responsively issuing one or more safety warnings. In various different embodiments, the issuing of a given safety warning takes the form of one or more CCSs transmitting one or more warning messages to one or more other CCSs, one or more CCSs presenting (e.g., visually, audibly, tactilely, and/or the like) one or more safety-warning indications, and/or one or more CCSs taking one or more other suitable warning-related actions. [Yonushonis, col 1, lines 50-63]”. Applying the vehicle tracking when out of line of sight of Yonushonis is obvious by simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result. Amla teaches the ability to track the location of a vehicle while out of line of sight by using wireless communication to allow for the vehicles to share their data with each other. Yonushonis teaches the ability to track a vehicle while visible and estimating its location when line of sight is lost. Both methods achieve the same result of tracking a vehicle that is not within a visible line of sight however Yonushonis does not require the other vehicle to have the required equipment to gather and transmit its own data and can work on more objects than just other vehicles allowing the system of Yonushonis to be more robust and less prone to wireless interference.
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amla et. al. (US 2017/0168503), herein Amla and Yonushonis et. al. (US 11,772,673), herein Yonushonis in further view of Chen et. al. (US 2023/0400863), herein Chen (from IDS).
Regarding claim 2:
Amla in view of Yonushonis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Yonushonis further teaches:
and the displacement information from a time point at which a position of the preceding moving body is last identified to a current time point (The MDM 510 may receive movement vectors and/or other movement data from and/or reflective of the movement of one or more subsystems [col 9, lines 50-52]).
Amla in view of Yonushonis does not explicitly teach, however Chen teaches:
further comprising an estimation unit that estimates, in the state of losing sight, a current position of the preceding moving body (in “(State 2) State immediately before tracking target loss” and “(State 3) Tracking target lost state”, estimation processing of a current position of the tracking target is executed using the sensor detection information and the like of the camera and the like in immediately preceding “(State 1) Tracking target confirmable state” or “(State 2) State immediately before tracking target loss”, and tracking target estimated position information 55 acquired as an estimation processing result is output to the robot drive information generation unit 107 [0172]) based on the position of the preceding moving body that is last identified by the position calculator (the tracking target position estimation processing executed by the tracking target position estimation unit 104 in “(State 2) State immediately before tracking target loss” [0177])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amla and Yonushonis to include the teachings as taught by Chen with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of having a vehicle follow a target. Chen teaches the benefit of “to provide an information processing device, an information processing system, a method, and a program capable of efficiently rediscovering a lost tracking target and continuing tracking in a case where the tracking target deviates from a field of view of a robot at an intersection and the like, for example, in a configuration in which tracking is performed while checking the tracking target with a sensor such as a camera and the like of the robot [Chen, 0014]”.
Regarding claim 3:
Amla in view of Yonushonis and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 2, upon which this claim is dependent.
Amla further teaches:
further comprising a target point setting unit that sets a target point to which the moving body is moved based on a position identified by the position calculator (To resolve the problems of boundary-crossing in such instances, it may be necessary to transmit a very granular set of coordinates, guidance instructions, or other data to set vehicle 221 along a path of travel that consistent with path 611 taken by vehicle 201 and that remains within the boundaries 691 and 692 of the desired path [0067])
wherein the operation controller performs control to move the moving body toward the target point (Computing unit (or electronic controller) 124 may process some or all of the received information and determine which commands to output to control unit 127 in the form of control data to control the vehicle 120 [0043]).
Chen further teaches:
or a position estimated by the estimation unit in the state of losing sight (tracking target estimated position information 55 acquired as an estimation processing result is output to the robot drive information generation unit 107 [0172]),
Regarding claim 4:
Amla in view of Yonushonis and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 3, upon which this claim is dependent.
Amla further teaches:
further comprising a distance calculator that calculates a distance between the moving body and the preceding moving body at a current time point based on a position identified by the position calculator (Sensor 308, for example, may sense the distance to vehicle 221, the speed of vehicle 221, the direction of travel of vehicle 221, the acceleration or deceleration of vehicle 221, the attitude of vehicle 221, the position of visible [0051]) or a position estimated by the estimation unit, and generates stop request information for requesting the preceding moving body to stop moving based on the distance (vehicle 221 may be directed by its controller to slow to a lower rate of travel or stop at a safe distance from obstacle 694 until vehicle 695 and any other oncoming vehicles that pose a threat have safely passed vehicle 221 [0070]).
Regarding claim 5:
Amla in view of Yonushonis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Amla in view of Yonushonis does not explicitly teach, however Chen teaches:
wherein the state of losing sight is a state where the position calculator does not identify the position of the preceding moving body, the state continuing for predetermined time (State immediately before tracking target loss is a state in which a state in which a tracking target cannot be confirmed has occurred for a prescribed time (t1) or longer on the basis of sensor detection information of a camera and the like [0299]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Amla and Yonushonis to include the teachings as taught by Chen with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of having a vehicle follow a target. Chen teaches the benefit of “to provide an information processing device, an information processing system, a method, and a program capable of efficiently rediscovering a lost tracking target and continuing tracking in a case where the tracking target deviates from a field of view of a robot at an intersection and the like, for example, in a configuration in which tracking is performed while checking the tracking target with a sensor such as a camera and the like of the robot [Chen, 0014]”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Reidevall (US 2012/0188124) discloses A GNSS receiver adapted to process radio signals transmitted from an active set of signal sources and based thereon produce position/time related data, the receiver comprising a tracking channel resource for each signal source in the active set, the tracking channel resources being configured to process the radio signals in parallel with respect to a real-time signal data rate of the signals, the receiver comprising a signal-source database describing the movements of the signal sources over time relative to a given reference frame, the active set of signal sources being a subset of the signal sources described in the signal-source database, wherein the receiver further comprises: a signal-masking database reflecting, for positions within a predefined geographic area, visibility/blockage to the sky with respect to a direct line of sight in terms of spatial sectors, and a control unit configured to: derive data describing a current position/time and a current velocity vector for the receiver based on the position/time related data, derive an estimated visibility of the signal sources in the active set at a second position/time representing an expected future position/time for the receiver based on the signal-source and signal-masking databases, and if at least one signal source in the active set is estimated not to be visible at the second position/time initiate a modification of the active set aiming at replacing the at least one non-visible signal source with at least one signal source which, based on the signal-source and signal-masking databases, is estimated to be visible at the second position/time.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Scott R Jagolinzer whose telephone number is (571)272-4180. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8AM - 4PM Eastern.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571)272-4190. 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.
Scott R. Jagolinzer
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/S.R.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights