DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “poor” in claims 14 and 15 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “poor” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate action is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eguchi et al US 2020/0380870.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Eguchi et al discloses a vehicle manufacturing system for performing control in such a way that a plurality of vehicles forming a platoon travel during a manufacturing process or a transporting process, the vehicle manufacturing system comprising: a computation unit 12/13 for computing a control instruction value for controlling a speed of the vehicle (see paragraph [0033]); a sensor 101/20 provided to detect an inter-vehicle distance (see paragraph [0018]), which is a distance between one of the plurality of vehicles and another adjacent one of the plurality of vehicles (see paragraph [0007]); a determination unit for determining, based on the inter-vehicle distance, whether or not the platoon is disturbed; a transmitter configured to transmit, in a case where the platoon is not disturbed, a common control instruction value to the plurality of vehicles (see paragraphs [0047]-[0051]); a communication apparatus 10 that is provided in the vehicle and receives the control instruction value; and speed control unit 12/13 for controlling the speed of the vehicle in accordance with the control instruction value. See FIG. 2 and paragraphs [0017]-[0022].
Regarding claims 2 and 8, Eguchi et al discloses wherein the transmitter transmits, in a case where the platoon is disturbed, individual control instruction values to the respective vehicles. See paragraphs [0033] and [0042]-[0044].
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Eguchi et al discloses wherein the transmitter transmits an individual control instruction value to the vehicle that has reached a predicted part where it is expected that the inter-vehicle distances will vary. See paragraphs [0047]-[0051].
Regarding claims 5 and 11, Eguchi et al discloses a camera 101 configured to capture an image of any one of the vehicles in the platoon, wherein the computation unit computes the control instruction value based on a result of capturing the image in the camera. See claim 6.
Regarding claims 6 and 12, Eguchi et al discloses wherein the control instruction value includes a value indicating a speed or an acceleration of the vehicle. See paragraphs [0034]-[0041].
Regarding claim 13, Eguchi et al discloses vehicle manufacturing system for performing control in such a way that a plurality of vehicles forming a platoon travel during a manufacturing process or a transporting process, the vehicle manufacturing system comprising: a computation unit 12/13 for computing individual control instruction values to the respective vehicles in order to control at least one of a speed or a route of the vehicle (see paragraph [0033]); a transmitter 101/11 configured to transmit the individual control instruction values to the respective vehicles (see S7); a communication apparatus that is provided in the vehicle and receives the control instruction value; and a control unit 10/12/13 for controlling traveling of the vehicle in accordance with the control instruction value See FIG. 2 and paragraphs [0017]-[0022]; a communication status determination unit 12/13 for determining a communication status See FIG. 2 and paragraphs [0017]-[0023]; and a control switching unit for switching control of the computation unit and control of the transmitter in accordance with a result of determining the communication status in such a way that the computation unit computes a common control instruction value for the plurality of vehicles and the transmitter transmits the common control instruction value to the plurality of vehicles. See FIG. 2 and paragraphs [0017]-[0023].
Regarding claim 14, Eguchi et al discloses wherein in a case where the communication status determination unit determines that the communication status is poor, the control switching unit switches control of the computation unit and control of the transmitter in accordance with a result of determining the communication status in such a way that the computation unit computes a common control instruction value for the plurality of vehicles and the transmitter transmits the common control instruction value to the plurality of vehicles. See paragraphs [0018] and [0047]-[0051].
Regarding claim 15, Eguchi et al discloses wherein in a case where the communication status determination unit determines that the communication status is poor, the computation unit computes the control instruction value so as to decrease the speed of the vehicle. See paragraphs [0018] and [0047]-[0051].
Regarding claim 16, Eguchi et al discloses wherein the transmitter transmits an individual control instruction value to the vehicle that has reached a predicted part where it is expected that the inter-vehicle distances will vary. See paragraphs [0047]-[0051].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eguchi et al, as applied above, in view of Dev et al US 2020/0209889.
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Eguchi et al fails to explicitly disclose, but Dev et al discloses an address granting unit 201/210 for granting, in a case where the platoon is not disturbed, a common address to the communication apparatus of each of the plurality of vehicles, and granting, in a case where the platoon is disturbed, individual addresses to the communication apparatuses of the plurality of respective vehicles. See FIG. 6 and paragraphs [0057]-[0058].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the address change as disclosed by Dev et al in the system of Eguchi et al for safety purposes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH J DALLO whose telephone number is (313)446-4844. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-7pm ET M-Th.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/JOSEPH J DALLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747