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 .
Priority
The applicant’s claim to priority of HUP2300002 on 12/22/22 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The applicant filed an IDS on 6/20/25. It has been annotated and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 10-14, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (KR 20200052751 hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly 10, 18 and 19), Park teaches a method for correcting a self-describing dataset of an ego-vehicle, wherein the self-describing dataset comprises parameter values of the ego-vehicle's vehicle parameters and/or vehicle states, the method comprising (See at least: “As described above, according to the present invention, high-precision positioning of the own vehicle is possible by classifying the own vehicle information from the received infrastructure recognition information and correcting the own vehicle positioning information to the own vehicle information of the infrastructure awareness information according to the accuracy of the infrastructure recognition information.”):
- a data collection step including - receiving, by the ego vehicle, a message from an other entity, and- extracting, by the ego-vehicle, ego-vehicle related data from the message, wherein the extracted ego-vehicle related data includes at least one parameter value of any one of the ego-vehicle's vehicle parameters and/or vehicle states (See at least: “Then, the positioning device of the vehicle 10 receives the infrastructure recognition information 40 including the location, speed, and status information of the vehicle, classifies the location information of the host vehicle from the infrastructure recognition information, and the location of the host vehicle relative to the infrastructure location Estimate and use the information to correct the location of the host vehicle.”),
- a data verification step including - determining, by the ego-vehicle, a reliability score of the extracted ego-vehicle related data (See at least: “As described above, according to the present invention, high-precision positioning of the own vehicle is possible by classifying the own vehicle information from the received infrastructure recognition information and correcting the own vehicle positioning information to the own vehicle information of the infrastructure awareness information according to the accuracy of the infrastructure recognition information.”), and
- if the reliability score of the extracted ego-vehicle related data is above a predetermined reliability threshold, comparing the extracted ego-vehicle related data with a corresponding parameter value of the self-describing dataset, and if the corresponding parameter value of the self-image is incorrect, updating, in a parameter updating step, the corresponding parameter value of the self-describing dataset with the extracted ego- vehicle related data (See at least: “In this case, the determination unit 300 may determine that correction of the own vehicle positioning information is necessary if the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor is higher than the positioning accuracy of the own vehicle positioning sensor when determining whether to correct the own vehicle positioning information.”).
Regarding claim 2 (and similarly 11), Park teaches wherein the other entity is a road-side unit (See at least: Fig. 1 and 3-6 item 20 “infrastructure sensor”).
Regarding claim 3 (and similarly 12), Park teaches wherein in the data collection step, messages are received from one or more other entities, and in the data verification step said messages are considered for determining the reliability score (See at least: “The infrastructure interlocked positioning system messages a plurality of vehicles 10 including the positioning device, the infrastructure sensor 20 sensing the location of the vehicle 10, and the infrastructure awareness information 40 sensed from the infrastructure sensor 20. It may include a communication base station 30 for transmitting to the vehicle 10 in the form.”; “That is, the infrastructure sensor calculates the relative coordinates and speed of the vehicle from itself, and the V2X communication base station can transmit a message including the infrastructure GPS location and the relative coordinates and speed of the vehicle. Here, the V2I message may include a driving history (speed and position change) of each vehicle recognized by the infrastructure sensor. In addition, when calculating the location information of each vehicle in the V2I message, the relative location of each vehicle is calculated by the infrastructure sensor, and the GPS absolute location of the previously known infrastructure can be included in the V2I message and transmitted to the vehicle.).
Regarding claim 4 (and similarly 15), Park teaches wherein the verification step further includes a scene analysing step, performed by a scene analyser unit, for analysing measurement conditions and a result of the scene analysing step is considered for the determination of the reliability score (See at least: “Next, the determination unit 300 acquires the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor measuring the infrastructure awareness information, acquires the positioning accuracy of the own vehicle positioning sensor measuring the own vehicle positioning information, and acquires the positioning accuracy of the acquired infrastructure sensor And the positioning accuracy of the host vehicle positioning sensor may be compared, and it may be determined whether the vehicle positioning information is corrected according to the comparison result. Here, the positioning accuracy may be a value that changes in real time according to the sensor measurement value and the driving prediction value. In this case, the determination unit 300 may determine that correction of the own vehicle positioning information is necessary if the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor is higher than the positioning accuracy of the own vehicle positioning sensor when determining whether to correct the own vehicle positioning information.”).
Regarding claim 5 (and similarly 16), Park teaches wherein the measurement conditions include at least one of the following: a sensor type, a view angle, a weather condition, a visibility condition, a relative position of the ego-vehicle and the other entity, and an occlusion possibility (See at least: “As described above, the present invention is a V2X infrastructure interlocking positioning technology that precisely estimates the location of the host vehicle by classifying the information of the host vehicle from the information of the vehicle recognized by the infrastructure camera / radar, and using this information to locate the infrastructure. It can be used in a vehicle to increase the positioning accuracy of the vehicle.” Figs. 3-6).
Regarding claim 7, Park teaches further comprising storing the extracted ego-vehicle related data in a database (See at least: And a correction unit for correcting the own vehicle positioning information with the own vehicle information classified from the infrastructure recognition information according to the determination result of the determining unit.).
Regarding claim 8, Park teaches storing extracted data having a quality indicator value above a predetermined threshold in a database (See at least: “Next, the determination unit 300 acquires the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor measuring the infrastructure awareness information, acquires the positioning accuracy of the own vehicle positioning sensor measuring the own vehicle positioning information, and acquires the positioning accuracy of the acquired infrastructure sensor And the positioning accuracy of the host vehicle positioning sensor may be compared, and it may be determined whether the vehicle positioning information is corrected according to the comparison result.”).
Regarding claim 9 (and similarly 17), Park teaches wherein the message is a V2X message or an 12X message (See at least: “That is, the infrastructure sensor calculates the relative coordinates and speed of the vehicle from itself, and the V2X communication base station can transmit a message including the infrastructure GPS location and the relative coordinates and speed of the vehicle. Here, the V2I message may include a driving history (speed and position change) of each vehicle recognized by the infrastructure sensor. In addition, when calculating the location information of each vehicle in the V2I message, the relative location of each vehicle is calculated by the infrastructure sensor, and the GPS absolute location of the previously known infrastructure can be included in the V2I message and transmitted to the vehicle.). Regarding claim 13, Park teaches wherein the ego-vehicle comprises a data extraction unit for extracting ego-vehicle related data from the message, wherein the extracted ego-vehicle related data includes at least one parameter value of any one of the ego-vehicle's vehicle parameters and/or vehicle states (See at least: “Then, the positioning device of the vehicle 10 receives the infrastructure recognition information 40 including the location, speed, and status information of the vehicle, classifies the location information of the host vehicle from the infrastructure recognition information, and the location of the host vehicle relative to the infrastructure location Estimate and use the information to correct the location of the host vehicle.”). Regarding claim 14, Park teaches, wherein the ego-vehicle comprises a verification unit connected to the data extraction unit, wherein the verification unit is configured to determine a reliability score of the extracted ego-vehicle related data (See at least: “Next, the determination unit 300 acquires the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor measuring the infrastructure awareness information, acquires the positioning accuracy of the own vehicle positioning sensor measuring the own vehicle positioning information, and acquires the positioning accuracy of the acquired infrastructure sensor And the positioning accuracy of the host vehicle positioning sensor may be compared, and it may be determined whether the vehicle positioning information is corrected according to the comparison result”; “In addition, when determining whether the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor is included in the infrastructure recognition information, the determination unit 300 acquires the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor if the positioning accuracy of the infrastructure sensor is not included, and the host vehicle measuring the own vehicle positioning information The positioning accuracy of the positioning sensor is acquired, the positioning accuracy of the acquired infrastructure sensor is compared with the positioning accuracy of the host vehicle positioning sensor, and it is possible to determine whether to correct the own vehicle positioning information according to the comparison result.”).
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.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Cho et al. (US 20210158701 hereinafter Cho).
Regarding claim 6, Park fails to teach the following limitation, but Cho teaches a step of, sending a message to the other entity comprising a parameter value of the self-describing dataset and request to sending back a return message comprising information in connection with the sent parameter value of the self- describing dataset (See at least: Figs. 12-15; [0130] via “In this case, the first electronic device may transmit a V2X message 1431 (e.g., BSM) containing low-accuracy location information to the second electronic device. On the other hand, when the second electronic device (e.g., the external device) equipped in a second vehicle 1420 is located in the outside 1402 of the tunnel as shown in FIG. 14, the second electronic device may estimate the location with a relatively high accuracy by receiving a relatively strong GPS signal. In this case, the second electronic device may transmit the location correction signal 1433 containing the location information of the second electronic device to the first electronic device”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Park in view of Cho to teach a step of, sending a message to the other entity comprising a parameter value of the self-describing dataset and request to sending back a return message comprising information in connection with the sent parameter value of the self- describing dataset so that the location information can be confirmed and/or corrected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry Oh whose telephone number is (571)270-5912. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 9:00-3:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY Y OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights