AUTONOMOUS DECISION-MAKING CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AVOIDING SECONDARY COLLISION OF VEHICLE

Application No. 19/147,049

• Filed: Jul 10, 2025
• Priority: Jan 10, 2023 — CN 202310035159.6
  • Oct 30, 2023 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2023127481
• Examiner: WHALEN, MICHAEL F
• Art Unit: 3661
• Tech Center: 3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
• Assignee: Tsinghua University
• OA Round: 1 (Non-Final)

Office Action

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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.

Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/10/2025 is being considered by the examiner.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a two-step inquiry.
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), see MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: see MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? see MPEP 2106.05
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 12 is directed toward a computer readable medium. The claim does not recite, and the specification does not define, that the computer readable medium is limited to non-transitory embodiments. A claim encompassing both transitory and non-transitory embodiments, such as applicant’s claimed computer readable medium, does not fall within one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (“A transitory, propagating signal like Nuitjen’s is not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.’ … Thus, such a signal cannot be patentable subject matter.”).
The claim may be amended to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 by adding the limitation “non-transitory” to the claim. Such an amendment would not raise the issue of new matter because the specification supports a claim drawn to at least one non-transitory embodiment.
Therefore, claim 12 is rejected under 35 USC §101 as being directed toward ineligible subject matter.

Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 and 15-22 are allowed.

Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2007/0125588 (Akgun et al.) teaches reducing the yaw moment due to a collision by moving the wheels back to there initial position (before the collision).
US 2024/0336259 (Kim et al.) teaches a system for controlling an autonomous vehicle after a collision.

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL F WHALEN whose telephone number is [phone]. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Peter Nolan can be reached at [phone]. 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.

MICHAEL F. WHALEN
Examiner
Art Unit 3661

/M.F.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661

Prosecution Timeline

• Jul 10, 2025: Application Filed
• Jul 01, 2026: Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)