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
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0004] : “…wherein the processor causes the system to one or more of store, by a vehicle, data of an area proximate the vehicle…” . What is this supposed to be?
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: (last line) “retrieving the stored data from the determined event.” would be better written as “retrieving the stored data of the determined event.” (“from” indicates a source from which the data is pulled, while what is happening is retrieving the data concerning the determined event.)
Claim 7: “…wherein the determining the event…” should be “…wherein determining the event…”
Claim 8: (last line) “retrieve the stored data from the determined event.” would be better written as “retrieve the stored data of the determined event.” (“from” indicates a source from which the data is pulled, while what is happening is retrieving the data concerning the determined event.)
Claim 14: “wherein the determine the event…” should be “…wherein determining the event …”
Claim 14: “…based on the compare…” should be “…based on the comparison…”
Claim 15: (last line) “retrieving the stored data from the determined event.” would be better written as “retrieving the stored data of the determined event.” (“from” indicates a source from which the data is pulled, while what is happening is retrieving the data concerning the determined event.)
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 8 mentions “…the at least one processor is configured to: store data of an area proximate…” It is assumed that the processor contains the instructions on how to do the storage, while the data is stored within the memory also mentioned in the claim.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 mentions “storing, by a vehicle, data…” It is ambiguous as to whether this means the vehicle provides the command by which the data is stored (potentially elsewhere outside the vehicle) or that the data is stored somewhere within the vehicle. For purpose of examination, it is assumed that the data is stored in a memory on the vehicle itself.
(Claims 2-7 are rejected under 112b as well due to their dependence upon claim 1.)
Claims 8-14 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "an area proximate the vehicle" in clause 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, this is assumed to be “an area proximate to a vehicle”.
(Claims 9-14 are similarly rejected under 112b due to their dependence upon claim 8).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0386268 (Scarbrough et al., hence Scarbrough).
As for claim 1, Scarbrough teaches a method (Fig. 5), comprising:
storing, by a vehicle, data of an area proximate the vehicle, the data collected by one or more sensors of the vehicle ("A camera may continuously capture video data irrespective of whether the vehicle is turned on and stationary, the vehicle is turned on and moving, or the vehicle is turned off. When the vehicle is turned on, a power source of the vehicle may provide power to the camera and/or charge a rechargeable battery of the camera. When the vehicle is turned off, the camera may operate using power from the rechargeable battery. The camera may be capable to storing a certain amount of video data ( e.g., up to 6 hours of video data)"[0062]);
determining, by the vehicle, an event at a time based on the data from the one or more sensors ("a technical solution is described herein for a vehicle device associated with a vehicle to detect the event based on sensor data satisfying a threshold, where the threshold may be based on an on-off status of the vehicle and a sensor type. The vehicle device may detect the event by detecting that the event has occurred or by detecting that the event is expected to occur (e.g., the event is imminent)."[0012]);
displaying, on a device associated with a user of the vehicle, a portion of the data ("As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well));
sending, by the vehicle, an event notification to the device based on the event, wherein the event notification includes the time ("As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well); "The video data may be accessible to the user to learn about the event ( e.g., time of event, other vehicles in the event, and/or perpetrators involved in the event)."[0010]; "In some implementations, the camera may continuously capture video data of a scene associated with the vehicle, irrespective of whether the event is detected. When the event is detected, the vehicle device may identify a portion of the video data that corresponds to the event. For example, the vehicle device may identify time points associated with the event, and the vehicle device may identify corresponding time points in the video data captured by the camera."[0015]);
and retrieving the stored data [of] the determined event. (under BRI this could be the vehicle device retrieving from a longer piece of video the section of video corresponding to the duration of the event. "As shown by reference number 208, the vehicle device may generate a portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event. The portion of video data may be derived from a larger video data file stored in a memory. For example, the vehicle device may generate a 15 minute portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event, where the 15 minute portion of video data may be derived from a 6 hour long video data file.")
As for claim 3, Scarbrough teaches wherein the one or more sensors of the vehicle are comprised of at least one type of sensor based on an environment of the vehicle. (Fig. 1A Also, certain sensors may be turned on only when the vehicle is active or in fact moving. See [0022].)
As for claim 4, Scarbrough teaches wherein the data stored by the one or more sensors of the vehicle is initiated by the event. (Video from the cameras initiated by results from vehicle sensors; see Fig. 2A; also see [0020] for when the cameras get turned on.)
As for claim 5, Scarbrough teaches wherein the event notification is sent to an entity associated with a safe operation of the vehicle. (See Fig. 3, which shows connections to an insurance system and a law enforcement system.)
As for claim 6, Scarbrough teaches wherein the event notification indicates a severity of the event. (See [0070], where the severity of the event results in different amounts of time being measured before and after the event. See [0064] for definitions of "first period" (before event), "second period" (during event), and third period (after event). Since the entire length of clipped video (first period plus second period plus third period) is what is being sent (210 in Fig. 2B), the length of the video itself indicates the severity level, even if not otherwise so labeled.)
As for claim 7, Scarbrough teaches wherein [determining] the event further comprises: comparing the data collected by the one or more sensors of the vehicle to an impending result ([0025]; also [0037], "In some implementations, the vehicle device may store, in the memory, a number of sound clips or audio footprints (e.g., audio patterns or an indication of characteristics of a particular sound, such as frequency, pitch, and/or amplitude patterns) corresponding to different events...The vehicle device may compare microphone data received from the microphone to the number of sound clips and/or audio footprints..." [0037]);
determining a chance of the impending result, based on the comparing ("...and based on a match, the vehicle device may detect the event." [0037]; note that “matching” can involve amount of overlap);
and sending the event notification when the chance is greater than a threshold. (Thresholds need to be surpassed for "an event" to be considered to have occurred. See [0023]. Once this has happened, the rest of the system activates and the event notification will be sent along with such data as the relevant clipped video.)
As for claim 15, Scarbrough teaches a computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, that when read by a processor, cause the processor to perform: (See [0086])
storing, by a vehicle, data of an area proximate the vehicle, the data collected by one or more sensors of the vehicle ("A camera may continuously capture video data irrespective of whether the vehicle is turned on and stationary, the vehicle is turned on and moving, or the vehicle is turned off. When the vehicle is turned on, a power source of the vehicle may provide power to the camera and/or charge a rechargeable battery of the camera. When the vehicle is turned off, the camera may operate using power from the rechargeable battery. The camera may be capable to storing a certain amount of video data ( e.g., up to 6 hours of video data)"[0062]);
determining, by the vehicle, an event at a time based on the data from the one or more sensors ("a technical solution is described herein for a vehicle device associated with a vehicle to detect the event based on sensor data satisfying a threshold, where the threshold may be based on an on-off status of the vehicle and a sensor type. The vehicle device may detect the event by detecting that the event has occurred or by detecting that the event is expected to occur (e.g., the event is imminent)."[0012]);
displaying, on a device associated with a user of the vehicle, a portion of the data ("As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well));
sending, by the vehicle, an event notification to the device based on the event, wherein the event notification includes the time ("As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well); "The video data may be accessible to the user to learn about the event ( e.g., time of event, other vehicles in the event, and/or perpetrators involved in the event)."[0010]; "In some implementations, the camera may continuously capture video data of a scene associated with the vehicle, irrespective of whether the event is detected. When the event is detected, the vehicle device may identify a portion of the video data that corresponds to the event. For example, the vehicle device may identify time points associated with the event, and the vehicle device may identify corresponding time points in the video data captured by the camera."[0015]);
and retrieving the stored data [of] the determined event. (under BRI this could be the vehicle device retrieving from a longer piece of video the section of video corresponding to the duration of the event. "As shown by reference number 208, the vehicle device may generate a portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event. The portion of video data may be derived from a larger video data file stored in a memory. For example, the vehicle device may generate a 15 minute portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event, where the 15 minute portion of video data may be derived from a 6 hour long video data file.")
As for claim 17, Scarbrough teaches wherein the one or more sensors of the vehicle are comprised of at least one type of sensor based on an environment of the vehicle. (Fig. 1A Also, certain sensors may be turned on only when the vehicle is active or in fact moving. See [0022].)
As for claim 18, Scarbrough teaches wherein the data stored by the one or more sensors of the vehicle is initiated by the event. (Video from the cameras initiated by results from vehicle sensors; see Fig. 2A; also see [0020] for when the cameras get turned on.)
As for claim 19, Scarbrough teaches wherein the event notification is sent to an entity associated with a safe operation of the vehicle. (See Fig. 3, which shows connections to an insurance system and a law enforcement system.)
As for claim 20, Scarbrough teaches wherein the event notification indicates a severity of the event. (See [0070], where the severity of the event results in different amounts of time being measured before and after the event. See [0064] for definitions of "first period" (before event), "second period" (during event), and third period (after event). Since the entire length of clipped video (first period plus second period plus third period) is what is being sent (210 in Fig. 2B), the length of the video itself indicates the severity level, even if not otherwise so labeled.)
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarbrough as applied to claim 1 above, and further in light of “Analysis of the Influence of Foggy Weather Environment on the Detection Effect of Machine Vision Obstacles”, attached as NPL-Liu.pdf, henceforth “Liu”.
As for claim 2, although Scarbrough does not specifically teach adjusting, by the vehicle, the area based on an environment of the vehicle, the footprint of a sensor being restricted due to environmental conditions is known in the art. It will be adjusted for the vehicle naturally since the vehicle will not be receiving sensor data (say from a LiDAR set up, which runs a 3D grid when sensing objects) beyond a certain range. Usually, this is handled in vehicular systems by fusing together data from multiple sensors to provide a substitute measurement. See Lee, which in the last paragraph of the second page discusses sensor fusion to overcome the influence in adverse whether on assisted driving. The motivation for using Lee is to incorporate such technologies.
Claims 8, 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarbrough, in light of US 2020/0192366 (Levinson). comprising
As for claim 8, Scarbrough teaches a system, (Scarbrough: Fig.1) comprising: a memory (Scarbrough ; Memory 430 shown in Fig. 4);
and at least one processor, wherein the memory and the at least one processor are communicatively [coupled], (Scarbrough: Processor 420 shown in Fig. 4, linked to memory 430)
wherein [data][is] collected by one or more sensors of [a] vehicle (Scarbrough: "A camera may continuously capture video data irrespective of whether the vehicle is turned on and stationary, the vehicle is turned on and moving, or the vehicle is turned off. When the vehicle is turned on, a power source of the vehicle may provide power to the camera and/or charge a rechargeable battery of the camera. When the vehicle is turned off, the camera may operate using power from the rechargeable battery. The camera may be capable to storing a certain amount of video data ( e.g., up to 6 hours of video data)"[0062]);
determine an event at a time based on the data from the one or more sensors (Scarbrough: "a technical solution is described herein for a vehicle device associated with a vehicle to detect the event based on sensor data satisfying a threshold, where the threshold may be based on an on-off status of the vehicle and a sensor type. The vehicle device may detect the event by detecting that the event has occurred or by detecting that the event is expected to occur (e.g., the event is imminent)."[0012]);
display on a device associated with a user of the vehicle, a portion of the data (Scarbrough: "As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well));
send an event notification to the device based on the event, wherein the event notification includes the time (Scarbrough: "As further shown in FIG. 6, the method 600 may include transmitting, to a mobile device of a user associated with the vehicle, an indication of the event and the portion of the video data (block 640)." (See Fig. 2B as well); "The video data may be accessible to the user to learn about the event ( e.g., time of event, other vehicles in the event, and/or perpetrators involved in the event)."[0010]; "In some implementations, the camera may continuously capture video data of a scene associated with the vehicle, irrespective of whether the event is detected. When the event is detected, the vehicle device may identify a portion of the video data that corresponds to the event. For example, the vehicle device may identify time points associated with the event, and the vehicle device may identify corresponding time points in the video data captured by the camera."[0015]);
and retrieve the stored data [of] the determined event. (Scarbrough: under BRI this could be the vehicle device retrieving from a longer piece of video the section of video corresponding to the duration of the event. "As shown by reference number 208, the vehicle device may generate a portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event. The portion of video data may be derived from a larger video data file stored in a memory. For example, the vehicle device may generate a 15 minute portion of video data based on the duration of time associated with the event, where the 15 minute portion of video data may be derived from a 6 hour long video data file.")
Scarbrough does not specifically teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to: store data of an area proximate the vehicle, the data collected by one or more sensors of the vehicle. However, Levinson teaches a system, (Levinson: Figs. 1 and 3) comprising: a memory (Levinson: Fig. 1 shows memory 112 in vehicle 102, also shown in Fig. 3);
and at least one processor, wherein the memory and the at least one processor are communicatively coupled, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: store data of an area proximate the vehicle, the data collected by one or more sensors of the vehicle. (Levinson: Fig. 3 shows processors 312; "The vehicle computing device 302 can include one or more processors 312 and the memory 112 communicatively coupled with the one or more processors 312." [0056]. That the sensor data 104 is stored in memory 112, see Fig. 1);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to add a separate data storage memory such as outlined in Levinson to the system of Scarbrough. The motivation would be to provide further flexibility in memory capacity.
As for claim 10, Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, teaches wherein the one or more sensors of the vehicle are comprised of at least one type of sensor based on an environment of the vehicle. (Scarbrough: Fig. 1A Also, certain sensors may be turned on only when the vehicle is active or in fact moving. See [0022].)
As for claim 11, Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, teaches wherein the data stored by the one or more sensors of the vehicle is initiated by the event. (Scarbrough: Video from the cameras initiated by results from vehicle sensors; see Fig. 2A; also see [0020] for when the cameras get turned on.)
As for claim 12, Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, teaches wherein the event notification is sent to an entity associated with a safe operation of the vehicle. (Scarbrough: See Fig. 3, which shows connections to an insurance system and a law enforcement system.)
As for claim 13, Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, teaches wherein the event notification indicates a severity of the event. (Scarbrough: See [0070], where the severity of the event results in different amounts of time being measured before and after the event. See [0064] for definitions of "first period" (before event), "second period" (during event), and third period (after event). Since the entire length of clipped video (first period plus second period plus third period) is what is being sent (210 in Fig. 2B), the length of the video itself indicates the severity level, even if not otherwise so labeled.)
As for claim 14, Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, teaches wherein [determining] the event further comprises: comparing the data collected by the one or more sensors of the vehicle to an impending result (Scarbrough: [0025]; also [0037], "In some implementations, the vehicle device may store, in the memory, a number of sound clips or audio footprints (e.g., audio patterns or an indication of characteristics of a particular sound, such as frequency, pitch, and/or amplitude patterns) corresponding to different events...The vehicle device may compare microphone data received from the microphone to the number of sound clips and/or audio footprints..." [0037]);
determining a chance of the impending result, based on the comparing (Scarbrough: "...and based on a match, the vehicle device may detect the event." [0037]; note that “matching” can involve amount of overlap);
and sending the event notification when the chance is greater than a threshold. (Scarbrough: Thresholds need to be surpassed for "an event" to be considered to have occurred. See [0023]. Once this has happened, the rest of the system activates and the event notification will be sent along with such data as the relevant clipped video.)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarbrough and in light of Levinson as applied to claim 8 above, and further in light of Liu.
As for claim 9, although Scarbrough, as modified by Levinson, does not specifically teach wherein the processor is further configured to adjust the area based on an environment of the vehicle, the footprint of a sensor being restricted due to environmental conditions is known in the art. It will be adjusted for the vehicle naturally since the vehicle will not be receiving sensor data (say from a LiDAR set up, which runs a 3D grid when sensing objects) beyond a certain range. Usually, this is handled in vehicular systems by fusing together data from multiple sensors to provide a substitute measurement. See Lee, which in the last paragraph of the second page discusses sensor fusion to overcome the influence in adverse whether on assisted driving. The motivation for using Lee is to incorporate such technologies.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarbrough as applied to claim 15 above, and further in light of Liu.
As for claim 16, although Scarbrough does not specifically teach wherein the processor is further configured to adjust the area based on an environment of the vehicle, the footprint of a sensor being restricted due to environmental conditions is known in the art. It will be adjusted for the vehicle naturally since the vehicle will not be receiving sensor data (say from a LiDAR set up, which runs a 3D grid when sensing objects) beyond a certain range. Usually, this is handled in vehicular systems by fusing together data from multiple sensors to provide a substitute measurement. See Lee, which in the last paragraph of the second page discusses sensor fusion to overcome the influence in adverse whether on assisted driving. The motivation for using Lee is to incorporate such technologies.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANYA CHRISTINE SIENKO whose telephone number is (571)272-5816. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Kito Robinson can be reached at 571-270-3912. 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.
/TANYA C SIENKO/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights