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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's Amendment and Remarks filed on 4/8/2026. This Action is made FINAL.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Response to Arguments
(A) Applicant's arguments filed “Claims 1-19 have been amended as shown herein. Support for these amendments may be found in the specification, figures, and claims as originally filed and, more specifically, in at least paragraphs [0034]-[0035] and [0039] of the specification as originally filed. It is believed that no new matter has been entered through these amendments, and entry is respectfully requested. No subject matter has been disclaimed, and the amendment of certain claims is not to be construed as a dedication to the public of any of the subject matter of the claims as previously presented” on 4/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (A), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes the limitation of “determining a plurality of local lane probabilities associated with, respectively, the plurality of vehicle location signals, each local lane probability of the plurality of local lane probabilities being associated with a respective local map of a plurality of local maps generated for, respectively, the plurality of vehicle location signals”. In particular, the specification disclosed in Para 34 “the vehicle 102 may also produce local lane probabilities for each local map that is generated as the vehicle 102 traverses the environment” which does not indicate “determining a plurality of local lane probabilities associated with, respectively, the plurality of vehicle location signals”.
(B) Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed “Applicant has amended independent claim 1 (and similarly independent claims 7 and 14) to recite, among other things, "generating one or more vehicle control signals based on the trajectory" and "controlling an autonomous operation of the vehicle based on the one or more vehicle control signals." As discussed during the Examiner Interview of February 18, 2026, Applicant submits that amended claim 1, including at least these limitations, overcomes the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101.” on 4/8/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
As to point (B), the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 of claims 1-12 and 14-20 has been withdrawn.
(C) Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9, filed “Neither Bush nor Shapira, individually or in any combination, describes, teaches, or suggests each and every element as set forth in amended claim 1. In particular, Bush and Shapira are silent with respect to any features related to determining any local lane probabilities associated with, respectively, a plurality of vehicle location signals as recited in amended claim 1” on 4/8/2026, with respect to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
As to point (C), the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 1, 5-7, 11-12, 14, and 18-19 has been withdrawn.
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 is 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.
The amended claims 1, 7, 14 recited the limitation of “determining a plurality of local lane probabilities associated with, respectively, the plurality of vehicle location signals, each local lane probability of the plurality of local lane probabilities being associated with a respective local map of a plurality of local maps generated for, respectively, the plurality of vehicle location signals” which was not described in the specification. The amendment therefor is directed to new matters.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-13, 15-20 are rejected because the claims depended on claims 1, 7, 14 which is rejected base on the reason above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112, set forth in this Office action. In particular, the limitations of “generating the trajectory of the vehicle on the first road or the second road of the map by providing as input to an optimizer the odometry uncertainty, the plurality of location uncertainties, and the plurality of local lane probabilities” were not uncovered in the prior art teachings.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xu (US20210104155A1) disclosed an apparatus comprises means for splitting probe data, sensor data, or a combination thereof into at least one vehicle trajectory, wherein the probe data, the sensor data, or a combination thereof is collected from one or more vehicles traveling on a road segment. For each vehicle trajectory of the at least one vehicle trajectory, the apparatus also comprises means for processing said each vehicle trajectory to detect a slowdown event based on a speed reduction greater than a threshold reduction. The apparatus further comprises means for classifying a slowdown event type of the slowdown event based on a final driving location, a final driving speed, or a combination thereof of the at least one vehicle trajectory. The apparatus further comprises means for providing the slowdown event, the slowdown event type, or a combination thereof as an output for the road segment.
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 WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
6/29/26
Prosecution Insights