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 .
Claims 1 – 20 remain pending in the application and have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 – 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rejab et al. (US 2019/0329777).
Regarding Claim 1:
Rejab et al. teaches a vehicle comprising: a sensor (134); a communication interface (112, 110); and a processor (100) configured to control, based on sensing data received from the sensor, an autonomous driving operation of the vehicle (paragraph 0072), wherein the processor is further configured to: receive, from a driver of the vehicle via the communication interface, a request to activate a lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation (via 120, see also 602, 610, Figs 6 – 8, and paragraphs 0072); determine, based on the request, whether the vehicle is in a state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation; activate, based on the vehicle being in the state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation, the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation (606 – 610); determine whether to activate a discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Fig 6 – 8, 606 – 610); and control, based on whether the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation is activated, the autonomous driving operation of the vehicle (Figs 6 – 8, specifically 608, see also paragraphs 0095 – 0098).
Regarding Claim 2:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is configured to determine whether the vehicle is in the state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation by: determining whether the vehicle is positioned within an operational design domain; determining whether a device for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation is in normal operation; and determining whether a field of view for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation is satisfied (Figs 6 – 8, field of view is based on camera sensors, see Fig 3, and see also paragraphs 0072, 0095 – 008).
Regarding Claim 3:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is configured to determine whether the vehicle is in the state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation by: based on the vehicle being positioned within the operational design domain, based on the device for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation being in normal operation, and based on the field of view for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation being satisfied, determining that the vehicle is in the state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 4:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: based on the vehicle being in the state capable of performing the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation, determine whether the vehicle is in a state capable of performing the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 5:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: determine whether the vehicle is positioned within an operational design domain; determine whether a device for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation is in normal operation; and determine whether a field of view for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation is satisfied (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 6:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: based on the vehicle being positioned within the operational design domain, based on the device for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation being in normal operation, and based on the field of view for the lane keeping function of the autonomous driving operation being satisfied, determine that the vehicle is in the state capable of performing the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 7:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: control, based on the vehicle being in the state capable of performing the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation, the vehicle in a standby mode without activating the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 8:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is configured to: determine whether to activate the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation based on whether an automatic execution condition of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation is preset (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 9:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: activate, based on the automatic execution condition of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation being preset, the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 10:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: activate, based on the automatic execution condition of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation not being preset, the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation after receiving, from the driver of the vehicle, a request to activate the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 11:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: determine, based on the automatic execution condition of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation not being preset, whether a lane change is needed; and send, to the driver of the vehicle and based on the lane change being needed, a request for activation of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 12:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is configured to determine whether the lane change is needed by: determining whether the lane change is needed further based on at least one of: traffic flow around the vehicle, traffic regulations, or geometrical road conditions (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 13:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is configured to determine whether the lane change is needed by: determining whether the lane change is needed further based on at least one of: whether a leading vehicle is hindering traffic flow, or whether a roadway event occurs (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 14:
Rejab et al. teaches the processor is further configured to: determine, based on the automatic execution condition of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation not being preset, whether a lane change is possible; and send, to the driver of the vehicle and based on the lane change being possible, a request for activation of the discretionary lane change function of the autonomous driving operation (Figs 2 – 3, 5 – 8).
Regarding Claim 15:
See rejection of Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 16:
See rejection of Claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 17:
See rejection of Claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 18:
See rejection of Claim 8 above.
Regarding Claim 19:
See rejection of Claim 10 above.
Regarding Claim 20:
See rejection of Claim 11 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONG T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1899. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 - 5:00.
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, 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.
/LONG T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights