CTNF 19/097,085 CTNF 94282 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims This is a Non-Final Rejection office action in response to application Serial No. 19/097,085 filed 4/01/2025 . Claim(s) 1-3 have been examined and fully considered. Claim(s) 1-3 are pending in Instant Application. Priority Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of JP2024-144332 filed 08/26/2024 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/01/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by the Examiner. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “me36ans” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: … an extraction unit configured to …in claim 1; and … a provision unit … in claim 1. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Examiner notes that, for the claim features of claim(s) 1; support is given in the written description of paragraphs [0011]; and [0066]-[0067]. The claim features includes … an extraction unit configured to …in claim 1; and … a provision unit … in claim 1 are components are configured to control all or some of the functions of data, where the processor to transmit the integrated data and index data relating to the integrated data to the server, which is well understood as suitable as hardware. If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim(s) 1-3 are rejected under 35 USC § 101 based on the following analysis because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without being significantly more. Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter . Claim(s) 1-3 are directed to a computer-implemented method (process), and an apparatus, and an computer program product respectively. As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention. If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception. Claim 1 recites abstract limitations, including those bolded below: A vehicle data management system configured to manage, in a server outside a vehicle, data acquired in the vehicle, wherein: the vehicle includes a processor configured to detect, as an event, data having a predetermined pattern from a plurality of kinds of time-series data corresponding to a plurality of sensors, when a first event and a second event are detected from the plurality of kinds of time-series data, acquire first data from the time-series data from which the first event was detected and acquire second data from the time-series data from which the second event was detected, the first data being data for a first predetermined period including the first event, and the second data being data for a second predetermined period including the second event , when a type of the time-series data from which the first event was detected and a type of the time-series data from which the second event was detected overlap each other and the first predetermined period and the second predetermined period at least partially overlap each other, integrate the first data and the second data to generate integrated data , and transmit the integrated data and index data on the integrated data to the server; and the server includes an extraction unit configured to, immediately after the integrated data and the index data are received or when there is a request from a user, extract, based on the index data, the first data and the second data from the integrated data , and a provision unit configured to provide the first data and the second data to the user. These limitations, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes. More specifically, the “detecting” step encompasses a driver making observation, evaluation or judgement about the driving event with information such position and/or location, data acquired in the vehicle. The mere recitation of a generic computer does not take the claim out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea. If the claim recites a judicial exception in step 2A Prong One , the claim requires further analysis in step 2A Prong Two. In step 2A Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. Claim 1 recites the additional elements of: A vehicle data management system configured to manage, in a server outside a vehicle, data acquired in the vehicle , wherein: the vehicle includes a processor configured to detect, as an event, data having a predetermined pattern from a plurality of kinds of time-series data corresponding to a plurality of sensors , when a first event and a second event are detected from the plurality of kinds of time-series data, acquire first data from the time-series data from which the first event was detected and acquire second data from the time-series data from which the second event was detected, the first data being data for a first predetermined period including the first event, and the second data being data for a second predetermined period including the second event , when a type of the time-series data from which the first event was detected and a type of the time-series data from which the second event was detected overlap each other and the first predetermined period and the second predetermined period at least partially overlap each other, integrate the first data and the second data to generate integrated data , and transmit the integrated data and index data on the integrated data to the server ; and the server includes an extraction unit configured to , immediately after the integrated data and the index data are received or when there is a request from a user, extract, based on the index data, the first data and the second data from the integrated data , and a provision unit configured to provide the first data and the second data to the user . For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application. Regarding the data processing functions of the “A vehicle data management system”; “a server”; “a vehicle”; “a processor”; “extraction unit” and “provision unit” are claimed components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform the abstract idea. In addition, each of these additional limitations indicate a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Regarding the transmit and provide functions of the “ processor” and “ provision unit ”, these limitations amount to extra--solution activity (e.g., the transmission of information between devices and provision of information on a display, as described in paragraphs [0006]; [0036]-[0039] and [0066]-[0067 ] of the specification). The characterization of the “units” as being of the vehicles during the travel of the vehicles along the road segment amounts to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong Two, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). As discussed above, the data processing functions of the “A vehicle data management system”; “a server”; “a vehicle”; “a processor”; “extraction unit” and “provision unit”, amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, update, or generate) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. As discussed above, these elements also amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, which does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function. The Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. and buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere receiving or transmitting data over a network is a well ‐ understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). The characterization of “extraction unit” and “provision unit”, are “units” as being of the vehicles during the travel of the vehicles along the road segment amounts to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, which does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Though not explicitly recited, if there is a user selection on a user interface, (i) the Symantec, Internet Patent Corp. court decision cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that a web browser’s back and forward functionality is a well ‐ understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here) and/or (ii) the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. and buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well ‐ understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Dependent claim(s) 2- 3 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the previously identified judicial exception and/or aforementioned additional elements that were identified as well-understood, routine and conventional in the analysis above. Therefore, dependent claims 2-3 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claim 1. Therefore, claim(s) 1-3 is/are ineligible under 35 USC §101. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oitate (Pub. No.: US 2022/0319252) in view of Komala et al. (US 20190236058 A1), hereinafter, referred to as “Komala” . Regarding [claim 1] , Oitate discloses a vehicle data management system (see, Paragraph [0053]; “ a vehicle data management system ”) configured to manage, in a server outside a vehicle ( “ server 3 ”; and (see Paragraph [0054]: “ FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an outline of a data management according to an embodiment. A vehicle data management system 1 shown in FIG. 1 includes a vehicle 2 and an external server 3. A communication between the vehicle 2 and the external server 3 takes place via a network 4. In this communication, communication data COM2 is transmitted from the vehicle 2 to the external server 3. The communication data COM2 is stored in a memory device 31 of the external server 3. On the other hand, the external server 3 transmits communication data COM3 to the vehicle 2. The communication data COM3 is stored in a memory device 21 of the vehicle 2 ” and [0088]), data acquired in the vehicle (see, Paragraph [0049]: “ FIG . 7 is a f flowchart illustrating an example of processing executed in the vehicle when the dataset of the event to be collected is created. ”), wherein : the vehicle includes a processor (“ at least one processor 28 ”; and [0101]: “ FIGS. 7 and 8 are flowcharts illustrating an example of processing executed in the data processing device 27 (the processor 28) when the dataset DSET_CTE is created. The routine shown in FIGS. 7 and 8 a routine for creating the occurrence information OCR_PE and the data set DSET_CTE and is executed repeatedly at predetermined control cycle. Note that the routine for creating the DSET_ UTE is explained by replacing the “events to be collected CTE” in the explanation to FIG. 7 and the “data set DSET_CTE” with the “events to be uploaded UTE ” and the "data set DSET_UTE ” , respectively .”) configured to detect, as an event, data having a predetermined pattern from a plurality of kinds of time-series data corresponding to a plurality of sensors (see, Paragraphs [0045]: “ FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining an outline of processing when an event to be collected occurs ”; [0065] and [0069]-[0070]: “ Examples of the various data to be extracted include image data IMG, sensor data SNS and parameter data PRM. The image data IMG is data acquired by a camera of the vehicle 2. The sensor data SNS is data acquired by various sensors (an internal sensor and an external sensor) of the vehicle 2. The parameter data PRM is data of parameters used for various control of the vehicle 2. The cache of the extracted various data is collectively referred to " extracted data EXT_CTE ” .”; and [0074]: “ If the predetermined event PE that occurred corresponds to the event to be uploaded UTE, processing to create data set DSET_UTE of the event to be uploaded UTE is also executed. The create processing of the data set DSET_UTE is executed in parallel with the create processing of the data set DSET_CTE. The create processing of the data set DSET_UTE is explained by replacing the " event to be collected CTE ” in the explanation to FIG. 3 with the “ event to be uploaded UTE .”;), when a first event and a second event are detected from the plurality of kinds of time-series data (see, Paragraph [0065]: “ FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining processing executed when the predetermined event PE occurs. The vehicle 2 detects the occurrence of the predetermined event PE. If the occurrence of the predetermined event PE is detected, the vehicle 2 creates this occurrence information OCR_PE. The data of the occurrence information OCR_PE includes data of the event ID of the predetermined event PE and the data of time of the occurrence (e.g., time stamp) .”) , acquire first data from the time-series data from which the first event was detected and acquire second data from the time-series data from which the second event was detected, the first data being data for a first predetermined period including the first event, and the second data being data for a second predetermined period including the second event (see, Paragraph [0075]: “ Note that the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is E11 and the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is E13 correspond to the predetermined event PE of which the upload judgement is “ On” (i.e., the event to be uploaded UTE) (see FIG. 2). Therefore, the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Ell corresponds to one of the “ first and second events to be uploaded ” in the present application. In addition, the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is EI3 corresponds to the other of the “first and second events to be uploaded” in the present application ” and [0080]: “ FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining an improvement of the create processing of the data set DSET_UTE . The generation status of the events to be uploaded UTE depicted in FIG. 5 is the same as that shown in FIG. 4. That is, in the examples shown in FIG. 5, the overlapping period OVL exists from time T4 to time T5. Note that the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Elx corresponds to one of the “first and second events to be uploaded ” in the present application. In addition, the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Ely corresponds to the other of the “first and second events to be uploaded ” in the present application.” ). when a type of the time-series data from which the first event was detected and a type of the time-series data from which the second event was detected overlap each other and the first predetermined period and the second predetermined period at least partially overlap each other, integrate the first data and the second data to generate integrated data (see, Paragraphs [0077]-[0078] and [0079]: “ Therefore, when another event to be uploaded UTE (e.g., the predetermined event PE of which the event ID EI1) occurs during the crate processing of the data set DSET_UTE of an event to be uploaded UTE (e.g., the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is EI3), the management system according to the embodiment compares the priority PLs of these events to be uploaded UTE. And, based on the result of this comparison, the management system executes create processing to create data set DSET_ UTE of two types of the events to be uploaded UTE. ”; and [0080]: “ FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining an improvement of the create processing of the data set DSET_UTE. The generation status of the events to be uploaded UTE depicted in FIG. 5 is the same as that shown in FIG. 4. That is, in the examples shown in FIG. 5 , the overlapping period OVL exists from time T4 to time T5. Note that the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Elx corresponds to one of the “first and second events to be uploaded ” in the present application .”), and transmit the integrated data and index data on the integrated data to the server (see, Paragraphs [0051]: “ an example of processing executed in the vehicle when the dataset” ; and [0078]: “ If such the overlapping period OVL exists, the memory device 21 will contain the data set DSET_UTE in which a portion of the extracted data EXT_Elx overlaps with the extracted data EXT_Ely. However, reading this data set DSET_UTE from the memory device 21 and uploading it to the external server 3 may take a long time for all data set to be transmitted. In addition, the transmission of the duplicate data may compress a bandwidth, causing the transmission of other data by the vehicle 2 to be delayed .”); and the server (see, Paragraphs [0070]: “ Examples of the various data to be extracted include image data IMG , sensor data SNS and parameter data PRM. The image data IMG is data acquired by a camera of the vehicle 2. The sensor data SNS is data acquired by various sensors (an internal sensor and an external sensor) of the vehicle 2. The parameter data PRM is data of parameters used for various control of the vehicle 2. The cache of the extracted various data is collectively referred to " extracted data EXT_CTE ” .”; [0117]: “ external server 3 in response to the upload request signal . The approval signal is waiting to be transmitted depending on a state of the external server 3. For example , if an amount of data in the memory device 31 exceeds a permissive amount , the approval signal is waited to be transmitted ”)… however, Oitate does not explicitly discloses … an extraction unit configured to, immediately after the integrated data and the index data are received or when there is a request from a user, extract, based on the index data, the first data and the second data from the integrated data, and a provision unit configured to provide the first data and the second data to the user . Additionally, Komala teaches detect, as an event, data having a predetermined pattern from a plurality of kinds of time-series data corresponding to a plurality of sensors (see Fig. 12a) , when a first event and a second event are detected from the plurality of kinds of time-series data (see time series data from sensors 1-4) , acquire first data from the time-series data from which the first event was detected and acquire second data from the time-series data from which the second event was detected, the first data being data for a first predetermined period including the first event, and the second data being data for a second predetermined period including the second event (see different sampling frequencies for each sensor during vehicle operation) , see, Paragraphs [0118]: “ In at least one example embodiment, the frontend component 805 is operable to collect and store sensor data during operation of the vehicle 100 . For example, the vehicle sensor system 815 receives sensor signals from sensors 304 of the vehicle 100 during operation of the vehicle 100 , where the sensor signals are indicative of sensor data sensed by the sensors 304 . The vehicle sensor system 815 stores these sensor signals/sensor data on the storage device 820 for the duration of a vehicle trip. … A vehicle trip may be defined as the amount of time from when the vehicle 100 is turned on to when the vehicle 100 is turned off. However, vehicle trips are not limited to this definition, and a vehicle trip may be a design parameter set based on empirical evidence and/or preference .”; [0126] : “ As shown in FIG. 10, for a particular vehicle 100 , the vehicle sensor system 810 (illustrated as including various sensors) writes sensor data to the storage device 820 (illustrated as including a plurality of disk drives). Other data may also be collected and written to the storage device 820 . For example, the vehicle sensor system 815 may collect related to sampling frequency of the vehicle sensors, sensor health, timestamps, etc., and store this other data to the storage device 820 according the data structure shown in FIG. 10. ” [0130] “ FIG. 12A illustrates a diagram 1200 for explaining a method of processing sensor data according to at least one example embodimen t. Here, it should be understood that the diagram 1200 is described with respect to either a single trip (e.g., Trip 01 ) having a plurality of time periods T 01 , T 02 , etc. or a single time period (e.g., T 01 ) having a plurality of sub-time periods within the trip of a vehicle 100 with four sensors 1 to 4 operating for that particular trip ”; and [0131]: “As shown in FIG. 12A, the trip or time period includes a start time and an end time . In at least one example embodiment, a primary or reference sensor is selected prior to in conjunction with the start time of the trip or time period. As noted above, the selection may be a design parameter based on empirical evidence or preference. In at least one example embodiment, the primary sensor is selected based on its health and/or sampling frequency.”; when a type of the time-series data from which the first event was detected and a type of the time-series data from which the second event was detected overlap each other and the first predetermined period and the second predetermined period at least partially overlap each other, integrate the first data and the second data to generate integrated data (see Fig. 9-11) , and see Paragraphs [0133]: “ As noted above, the frontend component 805 is responsible for collecting sensor data sensed by sensors 1 to 4 and for organizing the sensor data into the data structure shown in FIGS. 9-11. As also noted above, the frontend component 805 records timestamps t 0 to t 9 at each sampling occurrence of sensor 1 . These timestamps t 0 to t 9 may be stored as part of the metadata described above with reference to FIGS. 9-11. After collection, processing, and storage of the sensor data by the frontend component 805 , the backend component 810 may perform further processing as described below .”; and transmit the integrated data and index data on the integrated data to the server (“ backend component 810 ”) ; and the server includes an extraction unit (processor 830) configured to, immediately after the integrated data and the index data are received or when there is a request from a user, extract, based on the index data, the first data and the second data from the integrated data (see Fig. 12B) ”; [0119]: “ In at least one example embodiment, the backend component 810 is operable to retrieve the sensor data from the frontend component 805, process/correlate the sensor data, and store the sensor data according to a desired data structure. For example, the storage device 825 receives and stores the sensor data stored on storage device 820, whereupon the processor 830 processes the data stored on the storage device 825 and returns the processed data to the storage device 825 according to the desired data structure (e.g., a desired folder hierarchy). According to at least one example embodiment, the processor 830 assigns metadata to the processed sensor data and stores the metadata at the storage device 835 and/or at the storage device 825 .”; [0133]: “ After collection, processing, and storage of the sensor data by the frontend component 805 , the backend component 810 may perform further processing as described below .”; [0134]: “ In more detail, the backend component 810 calculates a midpoint between each timestamp t 0 to t 9 . FIG. 12A illustrates these midpoints as m 1 to m 9 . The backend component 810 then creates a plurality of data buckets DBs, shown in FIG. 12A as DB 0 to DB 9 . With the exception of the data bucket DB directly after the start time of the trip and directly before the end time of the trip, each data bucket DB is created for a time period between two midpoints . ”; [0135]: “ The backend component 810 then correlates any sensor data collected by sensor 1 with an appropriate data bucket DB based on the timestamps t 0 to t 9 . For example, the backend component 810 retrieves the timestamps from the metadata of the node of the trip or the time period. Then, sensor data sampled at time stamp t 0 is associated with DB 0 , sensor data sampled at timestamp t 1 is associated with DB 1 , sensor data sampled at timestamp t 2 is associated with DB 2 , and so on .” [0136]: “ Simultaneously or thereafter, the backend component 810 performs a synchronizing process that associates all other sensor data collected by sensors 2 to 4 with the appropriate data bucket DB . ” [0137]: “ In conjunction with or subsequent to the synchronizing process, the backend component 810 stores the newly processed/correlated data in another data structure using the data buckets .”; [0139]: “ The backend component 810 may assign metadata to each folder DB 0 , DB 1 , etc. and subfolder S 1 , S 2 , etc. in the same or similar manner as described above with reference to FIGS. 9-11. The metadata may include a time period that covers a data bucket (e.g., start and end times), notes regarding the content of the sensor data within the data bucket (e.g., weather, traffic conditions, etc.), an identifier of the vehicle, a list of sensors within the folder or subfolder, and/or any other data determined to be useful for the application .” a provision unit (“search interface”) configured to provide the first data and the second data to the user (“developer”) See Paragraph [0165] “ The collection and processing operations of example embodiments a llow for the developers to search the same set of data with reduced processing powe r”, see also [0023]: “ the developers extract and search the sensor data collected at particular time points during the trip(s), and then use that data to improve the navigation abilities, machine learning abilities, etc. of the autonomous vehicles .”. As Oitate discloses an external server for managing various data acquired by a vehicle in combination with Komala teaching methods, devices, and systems for processing sensor data of vehicles. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to further modify methods , devices , and systems for processing sensor data of vehicles as taught by Komala. One would be motivated to make this modification in order to convey to have the ability to quickly compile, process, and search sensor data while also minimizing or reducing the amount of processing power used to do so (see, Paragraph [0023]). As to [claim 2] , Oitate in view of Komala teaches the vehicle data management system according to claim 1 . Oitate disclose wherein the index data includes first information on a start time and an end time of the first data and second information on a start time and an end time of the second data (see, Figure 7; and Paragraph [0067]: “ In the case shown in FIG . 3 , the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is EI3 occurs at time T1 . The predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Ell occurs at time T2 . Note that the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is EI3 and that of which the event ID is EI1 correspond to the predetermined event PE of which the event determination is “ On ” ( i.e. , the event to be collected CTE ) ( see FIG . 2 ) ”; and [0101]: “ FIGS . 7 and 8 are flowcharts illustrating an example of processing executed in the data processing device 27 ( the processor 28 ) when the dataset DSET_CTE is created . The routine shown in FIGS . 7 and 8 a routine for creating the occurrence information OCR_PE and the data set DSET_CTE and is executed repeatedly at predetermined control cycle . Note that the routine for creating the DSET_ UTE is explained by replacing the “ events to be collected CTE ” in the explanation to FIG . 7 and the “ data set DSET_CTE ” with the “ events to be uploaded UTE ” and the " data set DSET_UTE ” , respectively. ”; and [0108]: “ After the processing of the step S17 , the processing of the step S18 is executed . In the processing in the step S18 , the creation of the data set DSET_Elx is stopped . And the overlapping period OVL is calculated based on the time of the occurrence of the predetermined event PE of which the event ID is Elx and that of which the event ID is Ely , and the first period P1 and the second period P2 . Then , the data ( duplicate data ) in the overlapping period OVL is deleted from the data set DSET_Elx that has already been created ”). As to [claim 3] , Oitate in view of Komala teaches the vehicle data management system according to claim 1. Oitate disclose wherein : the processor is configured to set a first timing to transmit the first data to the server based on the first predetermined period and a second timing to transmit the second data to the server based on the second predetermined period; and a timing to transmit the integrated data to the server is either the first timing or the second timing, whichever is earlier (see, Paragraph [0128]-[0130]: “ Further , according to the management system , it is possible to upload the data set DSET_UTE of the event to be uploaded UTE having higher priority PL to the external server 3 at an earlier timing . Furthermore , for the events to be uploaded UTE having equivalent priority PL , it is possible to upload the data set DSET_UTE of the event to be uploaded UTE having earlier the time of the occurrence to the external server 3 at an earlier timing ”). Relative Prior Art Lambert et al. (Pub. No.: US 2015/0310676), teaches a dynamic uploading protocol comprises an input interface configured to receive a manifest comprising a plurality of events which may be uploaded; wherein the manifest additionally comprises sensor information relating to each of the plurality of events. The system for a dynamic uploading protocol additionally comprises a processor configured to determine whether to upload additional information about each event, wherein determining whether to upload additional information about each event is based at least in part on the sensor information and contextual information. The system for a dynamic uploading protocol additionally comprises an output interface configured to request the additional information. Baum et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0156244), teaches information organization, search, and retrieval and more particularly to time series data organization, search, and retrieval (see, Paragraph [0002]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAKARI UNDERWOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-8462. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 TO 4:30. 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, Abby Flynn can be reached (571) 272-9855 . 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. /B.U./ Examiner, Art Unit 3663 /ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 2 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 3 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 4 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 5 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 6 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 7 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 8 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 9 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 10 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 11 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 12 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 13 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 14 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 15 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 16 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 17 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 18 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 19 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 20 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 21 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 22 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 23 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 24 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 25 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 26 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/097,085 Page 27 Art Unit: 3663
Prosecution Insights