DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s contention (see page 6 filed 13 May 2026) with respect to the rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been fully considered and is persuasive in view of the amendments provided. Therefore, the rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn.
3. Applicant’s contention (see page 6 filed 13 May 2026) with respect to the rejection of independent claims 1, 4, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102 has been fully considered and is persuasive in view of the amendments provided. Therefore, the rejection of independent claims 1, 4, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102 has been withdrawn.
Subsequently, the prior art rejections of all claims dependent therefrom are withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are warranted (see below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 2022/0364866), and further in view of Matsumoto (US 2022/0196430).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 5, Williams discloses an information processing apparatus with associated method and system (centralized vehicle routing and analytics computing method and apparatus; Williams at Fig. 1, 0101) comprising:
A communication interface (network 114; Williams at 0106).
A memory configured to store information on an operation plan that includes an operation route for each of a plurality of vehicles, a portion or whole of the operation route being included in one or more areas (VRA computing device maintains storage for routes of the autonomous deliver vehicles in the fleet; Williams at 0007, 0009, 0054-0057)
A controller (autonomous delivery vehicle controller 102 or VRA computing device contains processor coupled to memory; Williams at 0007) configured to:
Communicate using the communication interface (VRA computing device wirelessly communicates in bidirectional fashion with autonomous delivery vehicles in the fleet; Williams at 0007, 0054, 0106).
Transmit, to a terminal apparatus, information indicating a first area for which an operation corresponding to a non-operable reason has occurred after the plurality of vehicles has started operating on the operation route for each of the plurality of vehicles (VRA receives real time area updates on weather, road conditions including closure, vehicle accidents, etc; Williams at 0016, 0053, 0071, 0153).
Upon receiving, from the terminal apparatus, an instruction to cease operating on at least one first operation route a portion or whole of which is included in the first area, transmit an instruction to perform an action according to the instruction to cease operating to at least one first vehicle operating on the at least one first operation route (autonomous vehicle instructed to cease operation on current route and resume operation on updated route in the delivery area; Williams at 0016, 0083).
Williams is silent as to the non-operable reason including a flooded section.
Matsumoto, in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor, teaches routing for a fleet of vehicle in a bounded area includes route updates to account for non-operable sections, including roads that are closed due to flooding (Matsumoto at 0023, 0057).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the claimed invention to augment the information dissemination of Williams with the updates of Matsumoto. Doing so would account for a timely reaction to road closures due to extreme weather.
Regarding claim 2, Williams discloses wherein in a case in which the at least one first operation route is a plurality of first operation routes and the plurality of first operation routes corresponds to the first area, the controller receives the instruction to cease operating, which is different for each of the plurality of first operation routes, and transmits an instruction to perform an action that is different according to each instruction to cease operating to the at least one first vehicle for each of the plurality of first operation routes (fleet autonomous vehicles receive rerouting/retasking instructions in a bounded geographical area; Williams at 0016, 0075, 0083, 0164, 0172).
Regarding claim 3, Williams discloses wherein in a case in which the at least one first vehicle is a plurality of first vehicles and the plurality of first vehicles corresponds to the at least one first operation route, the controller transmits the instruction to perform the action to the plurality of first vehicles (fleet autonomous vehicles receive rerouting/retasking instructions in a bounded geographical area; Williams at 0016, 0075, 0083, 0164, 0172).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M DAGER whose telephone number is (571)270-1332. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 0830-1730.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN M DAGER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
27 July 2026
Prosecution Insights