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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant remarks, filed on 06/22/2026 with respect to claims 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (JP 2022080061 A) in view of Kagawa (JP 2012006441 A) in further view of Tsuji (US 20180105171 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Endo teaches a travel assistance method executed by a controller(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device ), the method comprising:
setting a stop candidate position at a stop line positioned on a travel route of a subject vehicle (Endo, page 3 line 14, the deceleration target may include pedestrians, bicycles, and the like, and may include traffic lights, stop lines);
executing deceleration control which autonomously decelerates the subject vehicle for the subject vehicle to stop before the stop candidate position(Endo discloses stopping before deceleration targets such as a traffic light. Endo, page 6 line 13, the required deceleration in this case is, for example, the deceleration required for the own vehicle to stop at the position of the stop line. Endo, page 3 line 16, the deceleration support is, for example, driving support for decelerating the own vehicle to a preset target vehicle speed. The target vehicle speed is not particularly limited and may be 0 km / h or 10 km / h. Endo, page 6 line 19, the deceleration support preconditions are determined on the assumption that a stop line exists at a position a certain distance before the traffic light. );
Endo specifically fails to disclose executing traveling control which autonomously controls traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle travels at a set vehicle speed set in advance before the deceleration control is started;
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started.
However, Kagawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about driving support system, discloses executing traveling control which autonomously controls traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle travels at a set vehicle speed set in advance before the deceleration control is started (Kagawa discloses maintaining vehicle speed at desired speed, which corresponds to controlling vehicle to travel at a set vehicle speed. Kagawa, paragraph 2, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed. Kagawa, paragraph 50, if the current vehicle speed is equal to or less than the predetermined vehicle speed (eg, travel path limit vehicle speed + 10 km / h) and the vehicle speed can be maintained without stopping at the front intersection);
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed (Kagawa discusses allowing a vehicle to travel at its current set speed when it’s possible to pass an intersection(stop candidate position). Kagawa, paragraph 50, (S120-4) If the current vehicle speed is higher than a predetermined speed (eg: road limit speed-20 km / h), it is possible to pass through the vehicle without stopping at the front intersection at a predetermined deceleration (eg, 0.1 G).)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo with Kagawa to allow a vehicle travel with a preset speed while allowing it to pass an intersection(stop candidate position).By travelling with a preset speed, it is possible to estimate whether a vehicle can pass an intersection without stopping, improving driver safety. (Kagawa, paragraph 50, (S120-1) The timing which should arrive at the front signal intersection for passing without stopping is calculated. Further, in order to pass without stopping, the signal state is blue from a predetermined time (eg, 3 seconds) before reaching the front signal intersection until the arrival time).
The combination of Endo and Kagawa specifically fails to disclose driving a vehicle at set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started.
However, Tsuji, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about travel control device, discloses driving a vehicle at set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started (Tsuji discloses acceleration limitation (deceleration) can be aborted when a user depresses acceleration pedal and returns to an adaptive cruise control where the vehicle travels with a set speed. Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state (step S25) is restored immediately)).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo and Kagawa with Tsuji to cancel acceleration limitation (deceleration) of vehicle while controlling vehicle to travel in preset speed. By resuming driving the vehicle at preset speed after driver actuates an acceleration operation, it is possible to arouse the attention of the driver by continuing to limit the acceleration of the vehicle until the driver concentrates on driving. ( Tsuji, paragraph 20, after the departure suppression process or the avoidance process has been terminated or suspended, the acceleration/deceleration control unit may be configured to continue to limit the acceleration until the driving operation is detected, and relax the limitation on acceleration when the driving operation is detected. In accordance with this feature, it is possible to arouse the attention of the driver by continuing to limit the acceleration of the vehicle until the driver concentrates on driving).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)), further comprising:
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed when the accelerator operation is performed in a case where the subject vehicle is decelerating to stop before the stop candidate position(As discussed above, Endo discloses the ending of deceleration support when acceleration is performed indicating the vehicle passes the deceleration target(candidate stop). Endo, page 8 line 2, the deceleration support execution unit 15 ends the deceleration support when the accelerator operation of the driver is performed. For example, the driver's accelerator operation is prioritized and reflected in the traveling of the own vehicle over the deceleration support. Endo, page 7 line 31, the deceleration support execution unit 15 executes deceleration support when the driver releases the accelerator, if the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the preconditions for deceleration support are met, but deceleration support is not performed because the driver is operating the accelerator) or in a case where the subject vehicle is within a predetermined range from the stop candidate position.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)), further comprising: autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed when the accelerator operation of a depression amount of an accelerator pedal less than a depression amount of the accelerator pedal by the driver for accelerating the subject vehicle is performed(Endo discloses performing deceleration support when the amount depression of an accelerator pedal performed by a driver is less than the operation threshold value. This indicates the reverse operation( cancelling of deceleration support) is performed when the amount depression is more than the operation threshold value. Endo, page 7 line 5, when the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the deceleration support precondition is satisfied, it determines that the driver has not operated the accelerator based on the accelerator operation signal of the accelerator pedal sensor 3. For example, when the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal of the driver is less than the accelerator operation threshold value, the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the accelerator operation of the driver has not been performed ).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)),further comprising: accelerating the subject vehicle corresponding to a depression amount of an accelerator pedal when the accelerator operation is performed at a timing other than when the subject vehicle is decelerating to stop before the stop candidate position(Endo discloses determining whether the accelerator operation is performed before executing deceleration support. This indicates the monitoring of the depression is performed at a time prior to the decelerating operation. Endo, page 7 line 8, the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the deceleration support precondition is satisfied, but if the driver's accelerator operation is being performed, it is determined whether or not the driver has released the accelerator. Accelerator release means, for example, that the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal of the driver has changed from the accelerator operation threshold value or more to the accelerator operation threshold value or less ).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)), further comprising; and
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle continues the traveling at the set vehicle speed when the accelerator operation is performed before the deceleration control is started (Tsuji discloses after suppression of acceleration pedal a vehicle travels in a normal ACC state where it travels in a constant preset speed. Tsuji, paragraph 84, in the event that the driver performs an acceleration operation (depresses the accelerator pedal 90), the return process is canceled at that time, and the routine transitions (in step S25) to the normal ACC control (ST12.fwdarw.ST11 in FIG. 2). ).
Regarding claim 11, Endo teaches a travel assistance device comprising a controller (Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device)configured to—
set a stop candidate position at a stop line positioned on a travel route of the subject vehicle(Endo, page 3 line 14, the deceleration target may include pedestrians, bicycles, and the like, and may include traffic lights, stop lines),
and executes deceleration control which autonomously decelerates the subject vehicle for the subject vehicle to stop before the stop candidate position(Endo discloses stopping before deceleration targets such as a traffic light. Endo, page 6 line 13, the required deceleration in this case is, for example, the deceleration required for the own vehicle to stop at the position of the stop line. Endo, page 3 line 16, the deceleration support is, for example, driving support for decelerating the own vehicle to a preset target vehicle speed. The target vehicle speed is not particularly limited and may be 0 km / h or 10 km / h. Endo, page 6 line 19, the deceleration support preconditions are determined on the assumption that a stop line exists at a position a certain distance before the traffic light);
Endo specifically fails to disclose executing traveling control which autonomously controls traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle travels at a set vehicle speed set in advance before the deceleration control is started;
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started.
However, Kagawa, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about driving support system, discloses executing traveling control which autonomously controls traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle travels at a set vehicle speed set in advance before the deceleration control is started (Kagawa discloses maintaining vehicle speed at desired speed, which corresponds to controlling vehicle to travel at a set vehicle speed. Kagawa, paragraph 2, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed. Kagawa, paragraph 50, if the current vehicle speed is equal to or less than the predetermined vehicle speed (eg, travel path limit vehicle speed + 10 km / h) and the vehicle speed can be maintained without stopping at the front intersection);
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed (Kagawa discusses allowing a vehicle to travel at its current set speed when it’s possible to pass an intersection(stop candidate position). Kagawa, paragraph 50, (S120-4) If the current vehicle speed is higher than a predetermined speed (eg: road limit speed-20 km / h), it is possible to pass through the vehicle without stopping at the front intersection at a predetermined deceleration (eg, 0.1 G).)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo with Kagawa to allow a vehicle travel with a preset speed while allowing it to pass an intersection(stop candidate position).By travelling with a preset speed, it is possible to estimate whether a vehicle can pass an intersection without stopping, improving driver safety. (Kagawa, paragraph 50, (S120-1) The timing which should arrive at the front signal intersection for passing without stopping is calculated. Further, in order to pass without stopping, the signal state is blue from a predetermined time (eg, 3 seconds) before reaching the front signal intersection until the arrival time).
The combination of Endo and Kagawa specifically fails to disclose driving a vehicle at set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started.
However, Tsuji, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about travel control device, discloses driving a vehicle at set vehicle speed when an accelerator operation is performed by a driver of the subject vehicle after the deceleration control has been started (Tsuji discloses acceleration limitation (deceleration) can be aborted when a user depresses acceleration pedal and returns to an adaptive cruise control where the vehicle travels with a set speed. Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state (step S25) is restored immediately)).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo and Kagawa with Tsuji to cancel acceleration limitation (deceleration) of vehicle while controlling vehicle to travel in preset speed. By resuming driving the vehicle at preset speed after driver actuates an acceleration operation, it is possible to arouse the attention of the driver by continuing to limit the acceleration of the vehicle until the driver concentrates on driving. ( Tsuji, paragraph 20, after the departure suppression process or the avoidance process has been terminated or suspended, the acceleration/deceleration control unit may be configured to continue to limit the acceleration until the driving operation is detected, and relax the limitation on acceleration when the driving operation is detected. In accordance with this feature, it is possible to arouse the attention of the driver by continuing to limit the acceleration of the vehicle until the driver concentrates on driving).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (JP 2022080061 A) in view of Kagawa (JP 2012006441 A) in further view of Tsuji (US 20180105171 A1) in further view of Nakatsuka (US 20170113688 A1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1 (Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)),further comprising: autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed(Endo, page 8 line 2, the deceleration support execution unit 15 ends the deceleration support when the accelerator operation of the driver is performed. For example, the driver's accelerator operation is prioritized and reflected in the traveling of the own vehicle over the deceleration support. Endo, page 7 line 31, the deceleration support execution unit 15 executes deceleration support when the driver releases the accelerator, if the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the preconditions for deceleration support are met, but deceleration support is not performed because the driver is operating the accelerator.)
While the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji discloses cancelling of deceleration support when driver depresses an accelerator pedal, it fail to specifically teach cancelling of deceleration support when the accelerator operation of a depression period of an accelerator pedal less than a depression period of the accelerator pedal by the driver for accelerating the subject vehicle is performed.
However, Nakatsuka, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a stop control device for automatically stopping a vehicle discloses an overriding system wherein when the accelerator operation of a depression period of an accelerator pedal less than a depression period of the accelerator pedal by the driver for accelerating the subject vehicle is performed(Nakatsuka discloses overriding of operation when an actuation of accelerator is longer than a predetermined period. This corresponds to the period of the pedal operation by a driver compared to depression period accelerator. Nakatsuka, paragraph 69, the automatic stop control is interrupted when the accelerator pedal is operated during the automatic stop control, and, in addition, the automatic stop control is released when the accelerator pedal is continuously operated for a period of time greater than or equal to a predetermined time period (an override predetermined time period Tcth) ).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji with Nakatsuka to override an operation based on the period of actuation of acceleration pedal. A person of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated to combine the Endo and Nakatsuka to override a deceleration operation executed without user’s intention. By evaluating the actuation duration of the accelerator pedal, it is possible to confirm user intention and prevent erroneous activation of driving support by reverting to normal driving condition. (Nakatsuka, paragraph 84, In the stop control device 10, automatic stop control is interrupted by the operation of the accelerator pedal and automatic stop control is released by the occurrence of an accelerator operation for a period of time greater than or equal to the override predetermined time period Tcth. This facilitates a transition back to the normal driving operation even if automatic stop control is executed erroneously).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (JP 2022080061 A) in view of Kagawa (JP 2012006441 A) in further view of Tsuji (US 20180105171 A1) in further in view of Oguri (JP 2013218429 A).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)), autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed(Endo, page 8 line 2, the deceleration support execution unit 15 ends the deceleration support when the accelerator operation of the driver is performed. For example, the driver's accelerator operation is prioritized and reflected in the traveling of the own vehicle over the deceleration support. Endo, page 7 line 31, the deceleration support execution unit 15 executes deceleration support when the driver releases the accelerator, if the start condition determination unit 13 determines that the preconditions for deceleration support are met, but deceleration support is not performed because the driver is operating the accelerator).
While the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches decelerating a vehicle to a deceleration target, it fail to disclose a method further comprising: canceling setting of the stop candidate position for the stop line at a position closest to the subject vehicle, or
autonomously controlling the traveling of the subject vehicle such that the subject vehicle passes the stop candidate position at the set vehicle speed in a state where the stop candidate position for the stop line at a position closest to the subject vehicle is set when the accelerator operation is performed in a case where a plurality of stop lines positioned on the travel route are present.
However, Oguri, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about operational support device for a vehicle, discloses a method further comprising: canceling setting of the stop candidate position for the stop line at a position closest to the subject vehicle and (Oguri discloses an assist disabled region where the distance from a vehicle to a stop target is short. When the distance is short deceleration assist is not performed. Oguri, page 5 line 19, when distance and vehicle speed to stop position, it is inside support starting failure territory 40, specified condition is satisfied. This time, the operational support device 1 1 prohibits the assist by information offer device 5. As for the support starting failure territory 40, distance to stop position is short, it is decided as the territory where at the same time vehicle speed is large. Oguri, page 5 line 24, The support starting failure territory 40 distance up to stop line 11 is set to the range which is shorter than specified distance L1 ).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji with Oguri to disable deceleration support near a stop position where distance from a vehicle to the stop position is shorter than specified distance. Disabling assist support when vehicle is close to the stop position helps prevent discomfort caused by sudden deceleration before a stop line. (Oguri, page 5 line 23, if stop prediction information is announced and accelerator-off assistance is provided, it may lead the driver to decelerate suddenly. As a result, this may cause discomfort to the driver and lead to a decrease in the driver's tolerance for assistance).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)),wherein the stop line includes a virtual stop line(The present specification discloses the virtual stop line is a stop line installed on a map. Similarly, Oguri discloses a stop line information stored in a map database. Oguri, page 4 line 22, map information (the map, the rectilinear road, the curve and the Noboru descending/disembarking hill, the highway and the signal, stop line position and halt etc.) is remembered in the map database).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (JP 2022080061 A) in view of Kagawa (JP 2012006441 A) in further view of Tsuji (US 20180105171 A1) in further view of Kuno (US 20210370924 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)),
While the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the decelerating a vehicle to a deceleration target, it fail to disclose a method further comprising: resetting the stop candidate position at the stop line and resuming the deceleration control when a brake operation is performed by the driver after the setting of the stop candidate position has been canceled.
However, Kuno, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about driving assistance apparatus for a vehicle, discloses a method further comprising: resetting the stop candidate position at the stop line and(Kuno discloses decelerating a vehicle to an intersection region which is similar to a stop line. Kuno, paragraph 10, when the candidate target does not decelerate before the second timing arrives and the candidate target is still identified as the crossing target at the second timing, the vehicle starts to sharply decelerate from the second timing so that the vehicle is stopped at a position immediately before reaching the intersecting region ) resuming the deceleration control when a brake operation is performed by the driver after the setting of the stop candidate position has been canceled(Kuno, paragraph 51, the braking control ECU 23 resumes the process for controlling the deceleration As so that the braking force Bf is equal to the request braking force Brq ).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji with Kuno to restart deceleration based on brake request. By resuming a deceleration support when brake is requested, it is possible to indicate driver’s intention to stop at a stop candidate that may have been interrupted by accidental actuation of accelerator pedal.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (JP 2022080061 A) in view of Kagawa (JP 2012006441 A) in further view of Tsuji (US 20180105171 A1) in further view of Sato (JP 5129909 B2).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji teaches the travel assistance method according to claim 1(Endo, page 3 line 28, the driving support device 100 includes a driving support ECU [Electronic Control Unit] 10 that collectively manages the device; Kagawa, paragraph, the vehicle speed is automatically controlled so that the vehicle speed is maintained at the required maintenance vehicle speed; Tsuji, paragraph 73, in the event that the driver depresses the accelerator pedal 90, the vehicle 10 can be accelerated (in this case, the normal ACC state)), further comprising: the deceleration support execution unit ends the deceleration support while the setting of the stop candidate position is being canceled(Endo, page 8 line 2, the deceleration support execution unit 15 ends the deceleration support when the accelerator operation of the driver is performed).
While the combination of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji discloses engaging and disengaging decelerating support to a stop candidate, it fails to disclose notifying the driver of setting canceling information indicating a state where the setting of the stop candidate position is canceled
However, Sato, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about driving support device discloses notifying the driver of setting canceling information indicating a state where the setting of the stop candidate position is canceled(Sato, paragraph 33, the notification unit 60 is a notification unit that notifies the driver of the cancellation of the support when the support of the driving operation is canceled. Sato, paragraph 12, the driving support device according to the present invention is configured to support a driver's acceleration / deceleration operation as a driving operation support).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Endo, Kagawa, and Tsuji to notify the driver of the cancellation of the driving support. A notification system make the driver aware of the cancellation of the driving assistance system so that he/she can take full control of the vehicle. Sato, paragraph 74, by generating a notification medium such as light or sound and actively performing notification, it is possible to make the driver effectively recognize the support cancellation.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s
disclosure.
Ozaki (JP 5195155 B2) discloses a braking system that decelerates and stops a host vehicle according to a deceleration command from the temporary stop control unit.
Kusayanagi (JP 7129254 B2) discloses notification system based on determination of deceleration cancellation request.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 5712727298. 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.
/BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights