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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-5, 12, 13, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira et al., U.S. 2021/0103287 in view of Pogula et al., U.S. 2018/0005522 and Wall, U.S. 2008/0086258.
On claim 1, Shapira cites except as underlined:
A system for determining a location of a vehicle within a traffic grid, the system comprising:
a vehicle computer unit installed in a vehicle, said vehicle computer unit including a camera;
[0106] As human drivers typically rely on visual cues and observations to control a vehicle, transportation infrastructures are built accordingly, with lane markings, traffic signs, and traffic lights are all designed to provide visual information to drivers. In view of these design characteristics of transportation infrastructures, an autonomous vehicle may include a camera and a processing unit that analyzes visual information captured from the environment of the vehicle.
[0109] FIG. 1 is a block diagram representation of a system 100 consistent with the exemplary disclosed embodiments. System 100 may include various components depending on the requirements of a particular implementation. In some embodiments, system 100 may include a processing unit 110, an image acquisition unit 120, a position sensor 130, one or more memory units 140, 150, a map database 160, a user interface 170, and a wireless transceiver 172. Processing unit 110 may include one or more processing devices. In some embodiments, processing unit 110 may include an applications processor 180, an image processor 190, or any other suitable processing device. Similarly, image acquisition unit 120 may include any number of image acquisition devices and components depending on the requirements of a particular application. In some embodiments, image acquisition unit 120 may include one or more image capture devices (e.g., cameras), such as image capture device 122, image capture device 124, and image capture device 126. System 100 may also include a data interface 128 communicatively connecting processing device 110 to image acquisition device 120. For example, data interface 128 may include any wired and/or wireless link or links for transmitting image data acquired by image accusation device 120 to processing unit 110.
[0224] When, for example, a sign or even a particular type of a sign is locally unique (e.g., when there is no other sign or no other sign of the same type) in a given area, the sparse map may use data indicating a type of a landmark (a sign or a specific type of sign), and during navigation (e.g., autonomous navigation) when a camera onboard an autonomous vehicle captures an image of the area including a sign (or of a specific type of sign), the processor may process the image, detect the sign (if indeed present in the image), classify the image as a sign (or as a specific type of sign), and correlate the location of the image with the location of the sign as stored in the sparse map.
a priority detector unit communicatively coupled to a signal light controller at an intersection within said traffic grid;
[0170] The third processing device may receive images from the wide FOV camera and process the images to detect vehicles, pedestrians, lane marks, traffic signs, traffic lights, and other road objects. The third processing device may further execute additional processing instructions to analyze images to identify objects moving in the image, such as vehicles changing lanes, pedestrians, etc.
Pogula cites:
[0020] Once the ambulance reaches its destination, it is considered that that trip is completed and all applications (cloud and ambulance IoT) return to the default state and stay there until another incident is started by entering a new address by the ambulance driver or operator. In some embodiments, a single cloud infrastructure is capable of handling multiple on-duty ambulances in a city (or region) occurring in parallel, even from different hospitals, etc. For example, in case of multiple ambulances arriving at the same intersection at the same time, the cloud is able to “arbitrate” between them (e.g., based on first-come, first-serve priority) without any faulty operation at the traffic light controller. Integrated cameras on IoT devices (at the traffic light(s), on the ambulance, or other locations) may capture photos/videos of potential violators, which can then be sent to enforcement authorities for review/action. The full functional flow charts for each device (e.g., ambulance, traffic Signal, and cloud) are illustrated in FIGS. 2-3.
and
a wireless network connecting said vehicle computer unit with said priority detector unit;
[0109] System 100 may also include a data interface 128 communicatively connecting processing device 110 to image acquisition device 120. For example, data interface 128 may include any wired and/or wireless link or links for transmitting image data acquired by image accusation device 120 to processing unit 110.
wherein said vehicle computer unit uses said camera to determine said vehicle's position by:
imaging a unique landmark and determining said vehicle is on a road segment adjacent said intersection coupled to said signal light controller because of said unique landmark being imaged;
[0232] Data recorded in sparse map 800 may include position information based on Global Positioning System (GPS) data. For example, location information may be included in sparse map 800 for various map elements, including, for example, landmark locations, road profile locations, etc. Locations for map elements included in sparse map 800 may be obtained using GPS data collected from vehicles traversing a roadway. For example, a vehicle passing an identified landmark may determine a location of the identified landmark using GPS position information associated with the vehicle and a determination of a location of the identified landmark relative to the vehicle (e.g., based on image analysis of data collected from one or more cameras on board the vehicle). Such location determinations of an identified landmark (or any other feature included in sparse map 800) may be repeated as additional vehicles pass the location of the identified landmark. Some or all of the additional location determinations may be used to refine the location information stored in sparse map 800 relative to the identified landmark. For example, in some embodiments, multiple position measurements relative to a particular feature stored in sparse map 800 may be averaged together. Any other mathematical operations, however, may also be used to refine a stored location of a map element based on a plurality of determined locations for the map element.
Wall discloses:
[0012] The present invention in a preferred embodiment of the apparatus of this invention includes the area of interest being an intersection of one or more streets or roadways and in which the means for viewing the area of interest is a high resolution digital camera. A more specific embodiment features the high resolution digital camera having the ability to pan 360 degrees horizontally and 180 degrees vertically and zoom from 1 to 10 times with automatic focus. Also featured as a part of the present invention is a marker means of sufficient size and shape that it can be distinguished and identified using the camera. Particularly suitable for the marker means is a flat, geometrically shaped marker having a highly reflective surface, which is sized to be readily recognized by the viewing means or camera and is capable of night time viewing. For example, the marker may have fluorescent paint, which glows in the dark, or have an electrical glow wire, which is visible by infrared sensor in the camera.
[0034] For example, the locations and design of each marker means along the roadways, identification of each lane in the roadway from the intersection and for some distance out, say for example up to or beyond 2000 feet, each turn lane, parking space locations, major obstructions, such as buildings, trees, utility poles, sign posts, wires and the like which exist in the field of the camera's vision.
imaging a known object within close vicinity of said intersection, said known object being one of a plurality of similar known objects which are present at a plurality of intersections, each of said known objects having a generally identical known size and shape and having a generally identical position relative to said intersection to which it is in close vicinity;
calculating from said imaging of said known object, a distance from said known object based on an imaged size of said known object in said camera image;
and
from said distance said location of said vehicle on said road segment.
(translated, these claim limitations are asking the distance of the image of the known object to the vehicle, the vehicle being located on the road segment).
Regarding the excepted: a priority detector unit communicatively coupled to a signal light controller at an intersection within said traffic grid; as discussed above, Shapira disclosed an embodiment wherein the vehicle processing system, in conjunction with an FOV camera, obtains traffic light information. However, the traffic lights disclosed in Shapira do not cooperate with a priority detector unit.
In the related art of traffic controls, Pogula, as cited above, disclosed an embodiment in which multiple ambulances arriving at an intersection at the same time, require a decision to allow at least one of the four ambulances passage. The system discloses an arbitration system involving cameras, the traffic lights, and a traffic light controller to determine which vehicle has the priority to proceed through the intersection.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Shapira the features disclosed in Pogula such that the claimed invention is realized. Pogula discloses a known embodiment for refereeing which vehicle of a group of vehicles arriving simultaneously at a traffic signal should be allowed passage. One of ordinary skill would have included this feature to avoid system indecisions and facilitate traffic flow.
Regarding the excepted: a wireless network connecting said vehicle computer unit with said priority detector unit, Shapira disclosed an embodiment in which its system 100 included the use of wireless links to couple an “image accusation device 120.” Shapira nor Pogula disclosed the coupling of the cited priority detector unit to the cited system 100 using a wireless link. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Shapira the ability to couple the cited priority detector such that the claimed invention is realized. Shapira discloses a known embodiment wherein different modules are connected using a wireless link. One of ordinary skill would have included this feature to couple the Pogula’s arbitration device as a convenient means of adding a device to an existing architecture without the use of hard wiring.
Regarding the excepted: imaging a unique landmark and determining said vehicle is on a road segment adjacent said intersection coupled to said signal light controller because of said unique landmark being imaged, and imaging a known object within close vicinity of said intersection, said known object being one of a plurality of similar known objects which are present at a plurality of intersections, each of said known objects having a generally identical known size and shape and having a generally identical position relative to said intersection to which it is in close vicinity;
calculating from said imaging of said known object, a distance from said known object based on an imaged size of said known object in said camera image;
and from said distance said location of said vehicle on said road segment,
Shapira, as previously disclosed, included an embodiment determining the distance from a vehicle to a landmark. Shapira didn’t disclose associating the landmark to an intersection. In the same art of vehicle location, Wall, [0012] above, disclosed an embodiment wherein markers are used to identify the location of roadways to include, among other things, intersections, signposts and the like.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Shapira the use of markers to locate different objects and roads, such as the cited intersection, wherein the cited landmark takes the place of the cited markers. One of ordinary skill would have included using landmarks to locate a collocated intersection as a quicker way to identify the location of the road.
On claim 2, Shapira cites:
The system of claim 1, further comprising determining said vehicle's velocity by evaluating a change in said imaged size of said known object over time.
[0307] The identification of the landmark may include a size of the landmark. The processor provided on a vehicle (e.g., 1205) may estimate the physical size of the landmark based on the analysis of the images. Server 1230 may receive multiple estimates of the physical size of the same landmark from different vehicles over different drives. Server 1230 may average the different estimates to arrive at a physical size for the landmark, and store that landmark size in the road model. The physical size estimate may be used to further determine or estimate a distance from the vehicle to the landmark. The distance to the landmark may be estimated based on the current speed of the vehicle and a scale of expansion based on the position of the landmark appearing in the images relative to the focus of expansion of the camera. For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image from the landmark at time t1 to the focus of expansion, and D is the change in distance for the landmark in the image from t1 to t2. dt represents the (t2−t1). For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image between the landmark and the focus of expansion, dt is a time interval, and D is the image displacement of the landmark along the epipolar line. Other equations equivalent to the above equation, such as Z=V*ω/Δω, may be used for estimating the distance to the landmark. Here, V is the vehicle speed, ω is an image length (like the object width), and Δω is the change of that image length in a unit of time.
On claim 3, Shapira discloses:
The system of claim 2, further comprising calculating said vehicle's estimated time of arrival at said intersection based on said position and said velocity of said vehicle. See the rejection of claim 2 wherein Shapira discloses the time it takes to determine the distance to the landmark involving “dt” or “(t2-t1)” wherein the difference is time represents the present distance of the vehicle to the arrival time at the landmark. The cited collocation of the intersection and the landmark is disclosed in the rejection of claim 1.
On claim 4, Shapira and Pogula discloses:
The system of claim 3, wherein said vehicle computer unit requests said priority detector unit modify a signal light at said intersection based on said vehicle's estimated time of arrival at said intersection. See the rejection of claim 1 under Pogula which discloses:
[0020] Once the ambulance reaches its destination, it is considered that that trip is completed and all applications (cloud and ambulance IoT) return to the default state and stay there until another incident is started by entering a new address by the ambulance driver or operator. In some embodiments, a single cloud infrastructure is capable of handling multiple on-duty ambulances in a city (or region) occurring in parallel, even from different hospitals, etc. For example, in case of multiple ambulances arriving at the same intersection at the same time, the cloud is able to “arbitrate” between them (e.g., based on first-come, first-serve priority) without any faulty operation at the traffic light controller. Integrated cameras on IoT devices (at the traffic light(s), on the ambulance, or other locations) may capture photos/videos of potential violators, which can then be sent to enforcement authorities for review/action. The full functional flow charts for each device (e.g., ambulance, traffic Signal, and cloud) are illustrated in FIGS. 2-3.
As Pogula discloses a “first-come, first serve priority,” this means the first vehicle that is encountered at the signal is the one allowed to cross with a favorable traffic signal assigned to the first vehicle to arrive at the intersection.
On claim 5, Shapira cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 2, further comprising calculating said vehicle's estimated time of arrival at a location beyond said intersection based on said position and said velocity of said vehicle.
Shapira disclosed:
[0307] The identification of the landmark may include a size of the landmark. The processor provided on a vehicle (e.g., 1205) may estimate the physical size of the landmark based on the analysis of the images. Server 1230 may receive multiple estimates of the physical size of the same landmark from different vehicles over different drives. Server 1230 may average the different estimates to arrive at a physical size for the landmark, and store that landmark size in the road model. The physical size estimate may be used to further determine or estimate a distance from the vehicle to the landmark. The distance to the landmark may be estimated based on the current speed of the vehicle and a scale of expansion based on the position of the landmark appearing in the images relative to the focus of expansion of the camera. For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image from the landmark at time t1 to the focus of expansion, and D is the change in distance for the landmark in the image from t1 to t2. dt represents the (t2−t1). For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image between the landmark and the focus of expansion, dt is a time interval, and D is the image displacement of the landmark along the epipolar line. Other equations equivalent to the above equation, such as Z=V*ω/Δω, may be used for estimating the distance to the landmark. Here, V is the vehicle speed, ω is an image length (like the object width), and Δω is the change of that image length in a unit of time.
In the rejection of claim 2, Shapira disclosed an embodiment for determining the vehicle’s velocity related to the cited image size of the referenced object. Furthermore, Shapira disclosed an expression wherein:
[0307] For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image from the landmark at time t1 to the focus of expansion, and D is the change in distance for the landmark in the image from t1 to t2. dt represents the (t2−t1).
In other words, Distance Z=V (velocity of vehicle)*(t2-t1)(or change in time from the present location to the destination)*(R)(or the distance in the image from the landmark at time t1 to the focus of expansion, and D is the change in distance for the landmark in the image from t2-t1). However, this expression is otherwise a form of the known formula “Distance=Velocity*(t2-t1)” without the R/D ratio used to account for change in image size.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Shapira the known formula “Distance=Velocity*(t2-t1),” rearrange the formula to be “Distance/ Velocity = (t2-t1)” such that the claimed invention is realized. One of ordinary skill would have arrived at knowing the time it takes for a vehicle to travel from its present location to the destination based on knowing the distance to the location, and the current velocity of the vehicle.
Furthermore, the examiner asserts an Office Notice regarding the cited “Distance=Velocity*(t2-t1).” MPEP 2144.03.
On claim 12, Shapira and Pogula cites: The system of claim 1, wherein said vehicle is an emergency vehicle. See the rejection of claim 1 citing Pogula.
On claim 13, Shapira, Pogula, and Cross cites:
The system of claim 12, wherein said vehicle computer unit requests said priority detector unit modify a signal light at said intersection because said vehicle is said emergency vehicle. See the rejection of claim 1 citing Pogula.
On clam 15, Shapira, Pogula, and Wall cites: The system of claim 1, wherein said known object is a traffic sign. See the rejection of claim 1 citing Wall and the cited marker (as in “mile marker”).
On claim 18, Shapria, Pogula, and Wall cites:
A method for determining a location of a vehicle within a traffic grid, the method comprising:
providing a vehicle computer unit installed in a vehicle, said vehicle computer unit including a camera;
providing a priority detector unit communicatively coupled to a signal light controller at an intersection within said traffic grid; and
providing a wireless network connecting said vehicle computer unit with said priority detector unit;
said vehicle computer unit using said camera to determine said vehicle's position by:
imaging a unique landmark and determining said vehicle is on a road segment adjacent said intersection coupled to said signal light controller because of said unique landmark being imaged;
imaging a known object within close vicinity of said intersection, said known object being one of a plurality of similar known objects which are present at a plurality of intersections, each of said known objects having a generally identical known size and shape and having a generally identical position relative to said intersection to which it is in close vicinity; calculating from said imaging of said known object, a distance from said known object based on an imaged size of said known object in said camera image; and determining from said distance said location of said vehicle on said road segment.
See the rejection of claim 1 citing Shapira in view of Pogula and Wall.
On claim 19, Shapira cites:
The method of claim 18, further comprising determining said vehicle's velocity by evaluating a change in said imaged size of said known object over time.
[0307] The identification of the landmark may include a size of the landmark. The processor provided on a vehicle (e.g., 1205) may estimate the physical size of the landmark based on the analysis of the images. Server 1230 may receive multiple estimates of the physical size of the same landmark from different vehicles over different drives. Server 1230 may average the different estimates to arrive at a physical size for the landmark, and store that landmark size in the road model. The physical size estimate may be used to further determine or estimate a distance from the vehicle to the landmark. The distance to the landmark may be estimated based on the current speed of the vehicle and a scale of expansion based on the position of the landmark appearing in the images relative to the focus of expansion of the camera. For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image from the landmark at time t1 to the focus of expansion, and D is the change in distance for the landmark in the image from t1 to t2. dt represents the (t2−t1). For example, the distance to landmark may be estimated by Z=V*dt*R/D, where V is the speed of vehicle, R is the distance in the image between the landmark and the focus of expansion, dt is a time interval, and D is the image displacement of the landmark along the epipolar line. Other equations equivalent to the above equation, such as Z=V*ω/Δω, may be used for estimating the distance to the landmark. Here, V is the vehicle speed, ω is an image length (like the object width), and Δω is the change of that image length in a unit of time.
On claim 20, Shapira cites:
The method of claim 19, further comprising calculating said vehicle's estimated time of arrival at said intersection based on said position and said velocity of said vehicle. See the rejection of claim 2 wherein Shapira discloses the time it takes to determine the distance to the landmark involving “dt” or “(t2-t1)” wherein the difference is time represents the present distance of the vehicle to the arrival time at the landmark. The cited collocation of the intersection and the landmark is disclosed in the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 6-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira et al., U.S. 2021/0103287 in view of Pogula et al., U.S. 2018/0005522 and Wall, U.S. 2008/0086258 and Cross, U.S. 2012/0326891.
On claim 6, Shapira cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 5, wherein said vehicle computer unit requests said priority detector unit modify a signal light at said intersection based on said vehicle's estimated time of arrival at said location beyond said intersection.
In the rejection of claim 1, Pogula disclosed an embodiment wherein vehicles arriving at the cited intersection were subjected to a condition of “first come first served,” that is:
[0020] For example, in case of multiple ambulances arriving at the same intersection at the same time, the cloud is able to “arbitrate” between them (e.g., based on first-come, first-serve priority)
Furthermore, in the rejection of claim 5, Shapira, as modified in that claim, disclosed an embodiment wherein the arrival time of a vehicle going past the intersection was calculated based on the vehicle’s speed and the present distance of the vehicle to the destination, the destination being past the intersection. However, neither Pogula nor Shapira disclosed an embodiment meeting the excepted claim limitations.
In the same art of traffic light management, Cross discloses:
[0020] Because of these and other problems in the art, described herein, among other things, are methods and systems for requesting modification of traffic flow control systems wherein a vehicle's real-time location and estimated time of arrival (ETA) is utilized to modify the priority management cycles of multiple traffic lights in a traffic grid to assist a given vehicle in arriving at a predetermined destination on a predetermined time schedule.
[0036] As demonstrated in a street-view of an embodiment of the system provided in FIG. 5, the VCU (101) is installed in a monitored vehicle in the traffic grid. As noted previously, contemplated monitored vehicles include, but are not limited to, mass transit vehicles (buses, trains, light rail, etc.), emergency vehicles (fire tricks, police cars, ambulances, etc.), waste management vehicles, and road maintenance vehicles. It should be understood that the system disclosed herein contemplates the installation of one or more VCUs in various vehicles traveling and operating in the traffic grid.
Furthermore, Cross cites the communications disclosed in the above embodiment are provided for using a wireless network:
[0052] Generally, the VCUs (101) and priority detector units (103) of the ETA traffic control system will be connected by a wireless technology known to those of skill in the art that allows for the free transfer of data and information between each of these components through a traffic control network (104).
[0054] As detailed more fully later in this application, in the centralized server embodiment of the system the remote traffic control center (102) is linked to the VCUs (101) and the priority detector units (103) of the system by a wireless network that allows for the free transmission of information and data therebetween allowing centralized control of a number of signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shapira and Pogula’s embodiment wherein the claimed “signal light” signaling is modified responsive to the ETA of the vehicle arriving at a final destination as disclosed in Cross. Cross disclosed an embodiment where a vehicle’s ETA to a destination (in this instance, say an ambulance driving towards a hospital) is determined by the traffic system and the traffic lights’ cycling times are adjusted for the vehicle. One of ordinary skill would have added this feature to Shapira and Porgula to provide a smoother traffic flow and path for the vehicle traversing the cited route disclosed in Cross.
On claim 7, Shapira, Pogula, Wall, and Cross cites:
The system of claim 6, further comprising:
a remote traffic control center, wherein the remote traffic control center is communicatively attached to the wireless network;
(see the rejection of claim 6 citing Cross)
wherein the vehicle computer unit transmits information chosen from the group consisting of: the vehicle's position, direction, velocity, and estimated time of arrival at said location beyond said intersection to said remote traffic control center;
Cross inherently discloses this in this passage:
Figure 1 and [0020] Because of these and other problems in the art, described herein, among other things, are methods and systems for requesting modification of traffic flow control systems wherein a vehicle's real-time location and estimated time of arrival (ETA) is utilized to modify the priority management cycles of multiple traffic lights in a traffic grid to assist a given vehicle in arriving at a predetermined destination on a predetermined time schedule.
In order to anticipate the management (that is, the enabling of multiple traffic lights along the route disclosed in Cross to determine an ETA or estimated time of arrival of the vehicle involved in the traffic flow management, the vehicle’s speed/velocity, direction, and present position must be given).
wherein said remote traffic control center determines a plurality of signal light controllers within said traffic grid which need to be modified for vehicle to reach said location beyond said intersection at a specified time;
See Cross, figure 1 and
[0052] Generally, the VCUs (101) and priority detector units (103) of the ETA traffic control system will be connected by a wireless technology known to those of skill in the art that allows for the free transfer of data and information between each of these components through a traffic control network (104).
[0054] As detailed more fully later in this application, in the centralized server embodiment of the system the remote traffic control center (102) is linked to the VCUs (101) and the priority detector units (103) of the system by a wireless network that allows for the free transmission of information and data therebetween allowing centralized control of a number of signals.
and wherein said remote traffic control center sends a signal to one or more of the plurality of signal light controllers to request modification of an associated signal light. See Cross, above.
On claim 8, Shapira cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 7, wherein said vehicle is a mass transit vehicle, said specified time is a scheduled time, and said location beyond said intersection is a service stop for picking up passengers of said mass transit vehicle.
As disclosed in the rejection of 4, Pogula discloses a “first come first served” management method for controlling an intersection when 4 ambulances show up coincidentally at the intersection, each vehicle occupying a different lane of the four lanes meeting at the intersection. Furthermore, Cross, in the rejection of claim 6, disclosed an embodiment in which a set of traffic lights in the path of a vehicle,
Cross cited:
[0020] Because of these and other problems in the art, described herein, among other things, are methods and systems for requesting modification of traffic flow control systems wherein a vehicle's real-time location and estimated time of arrival (ETA) is utilized to modify the priority management cycles of multiple traffic lights in a traffic grid to assist a given vehicle in arriving at a predetermined destination on a predetermined time schedule.
However, neither Shapira, Pogula, Wall, nor Cross, in those renderings, disclosed an embodiment involving the use of “mass transit vehicles.” However, in another embodiment, Cross discloses:
[0073] Another signal option for the disclosed system in certain embodiments is a system of conditional transit signal priority. These conditional transit signal priority signals are generally based on the amount of time a VCU-equipped vehicle is behind schedule. To achieve conditional TSP, the system is generally configured to request signal priority only when activated through a connection to the onboard schedule-adherence system. For example, when a VCU-equipped vehicle lags behind schedule by a set amount of time, the schedule--adherence system enables the components of the system to request signal priority for upcoming intersection. If the VCU-equipped vehicle is on schedule, signal priority is not requested, allowing the buses to better maintain headway.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the traffic management system disclosed in Shapira, Pogula, and Cross with the added embodiment disclosed in Cross such that the claimed invention is disclosed.
Cross discloses a known embodiment in which bus/mass transit vehicles are considered in traffic signal management. Cross discloses a condition in which buses influence the management of certain lights along its path. According to Cross, the cited system, when apprised by a bus describing scheduling issues, the system adjusts the signal priority for managing traffic signals ahead of the bus’s route. While not specifically disclosed, the management of the traffic light adjustments is provided to allow the bus to maintain headway, that is, allow the bus to keep on schedule to eventually arrive at the next bus stop or final destination, which is part of the bus’s route. One of ordinary skill would have included Cross’s embodiment into the prior embodiment disclosed in Shapira, Pogula, and Cross to assist in the bus to keep its intended schedule.
On claim 9, Shapira, Pogula, Wall, and Cross cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 7, wherein said vehicle is an emergency vehicle,
(see the rejection of claim 6 citing cross, [0036])
said specified time is as soon as possible, and said location beyond said intersection is a destination of said emergency vehicle.
As discussed above, Shapira, Pogula, Wall, and Cross discloses an embodiment in which traffic light management is adjusted such that a vehicle, to include the cited emergency vehicle) is given priority when traversing a specific course to a destination. However, the system did not expressly disclose the claimed “as soon as possible.”
Cross previously disclosed:
[0073] Another signal option for the disclosed system in certain embodiments is a system of conditional transit signal priority. These conditional transit signal priority signals are generally based on the amount of time a VCU-equipped vehicle is behind schedule. To achieve conditional TSP, the system is generally configured to request signal priority only when activated through a connection to the onboard schedule-adherence system. For example, when a VCU-equipped vehicle lags behind schedule by a set amount of time, the schedule--adherence system enables the components of the system to request signal priority for upcoming intersection. If the VCU-equipped vehicle is on schedule, signal priority is not requested, allowing the buses to better maintain headway.
In other words, Cross discloses an embodiment to allow a vehicle priority to manage traffic signals to facilitate a “schedule-adherence” system to expedite the vehicle’s traverse through a set of managed traffic lights. Cross doesn’t specifically disclose the claimed “as soon as possible.” However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Cross the requirement to provide a priority signal from an emergency vehicle such that the cited traffic light management system adjusts light management to accommodate the emergency vehicle’s request to manage the lights “as soon as possible.” As disclosed in Cross, already an embodiment exists to expedite vehicle movement through a managed path of traffic lights. One of ordinary skill would have included the feature of adding priority to a level of “as soon as possible” to further increase the urgency of light management for emergencies.
On claim 10, Shapira, Pogula, Wall, and Cross cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 6, wherein after said signal light is modified, said velocity is recalculated to determine if said velocity has changed. Cross previously disclosed:
[0073] Another signal option for the disclosed system in certain embodiments is a system of conditional transit signal priority. These conditional transit signal priority signals are generally based on the amount of time a VCU-equipped vehicle is behind schedule. To achieve conditional TSP, the system is generally configured to request signal priority only when activated through a connection to the onboard schedule-adherence system. For example, when a VCU-equipped vehicle lags behind schedule by a set amount of time, the schedule--adherence system enables the components of the system to request signal priority for upcoming intersection. If the VCU-equipped vehicle is on schedule, signal priority is not requested, allowing the buses to better maintain headway.
In other words, Cross’s embodiment rests on two propositions: if the vehicle is behind schedule, the system is adjusted such that traffic light management is enabled to expedite the vehicle through a route with traffic lights accommodate the vehicle’s travel. If the vehicle is not behind schedule, the vehicle is allowed to maintain its rate of travel to continue its “headway” as scheduled.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include into Cross the added feature of monitoring the vehicle’s timeliness in meeting its schedule such that the claimed invention is realized. Clearly, Cross includes an embodiment for adjusting the management of traffic lights to facilitate the movement of the vehicle if the vehicle is not on schedule while the embodiment also includes non-intervention of the system when the vehicle is on schedule compliance. If the vehicle, during one of these two propositions, either falls behind or exceeds its schedule, one of ordinary skill would have modified Cross to monitor and recalculate the vehicle for velocities that would unduly task the traffic light management system. One of ordinary skill would have included such a feature to ensure the vehicle stays on schedule by only engaging the traffic light management system when the vehicle falls behind in velocity which would cause the vehicle not to keep the schedule.
On claim 11, Shapira, Pogula, Wall, and Cross cites:
The system of claim 1, wherein said vehicle is a mass transit vehicle. See the rejection of claim 9 citing cross and the buses.
On claim 14, Shapira, Porgula, Wall and Cross cites:
The system of claim 1, wherein said known object is a signal light for intersections.
In the rejection of claim 1, Shapira disclosed an embodiment in which a landmark [0232] was used as a map location feature. Inclued on the map were “road profile locations.” Furthermore, the Shapira’s landmark was modified by Wall such that the cited landmark was replaced with he cited marker to associated the marker with the location of intersections.
[0034] For example, the locations and design of each marker means along the roadways, identification of each lane in the roadway from the intersection and for some distance out, say for example up to or beyond 2000 feet, each turn lane, parking space locations, major obstructions, such as buildings, trees, utility poles, sign posts, wires and the like which exist in the field of the camera's vision.
Claims 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira et al., U.S. 2021/0103287 in view of Pogula et al., U.S. 2018/0005522 and Wall, U.S. 2008/0086258 and Cross, U.S. 2012/0326891 and Frossard et al., U.S. 2019/0384994.
On claim 16, Shapira, Porgula, Wall, and Cross cites except as underlined:
The system of claim 15, wherein said traffic sign is a stop sign.
Cross cites:
[0034] For example, the locations and design of each marker means along the roadways, identification of each lane in the roadway from the intersection and for some distance out, say for example up to or beyond 2000 feet, each turn lane, parking space locations, major obstructions, such as buildings, trees, utility poles, sign posts, wires and the like which exist in the field of the camera's vision.
Cross doesn’t specifically disclose the claimed “stop sign.”
In the same art of traffic control, Frossard cites:
[0030] For example, the vehicle orientation can be determined relative to one or more lane boundaries, a traffic light, a sign post such as a stop sign, a second vehicle within the first vehicles surrounding environment, etc.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the cited “sign post” for the cited “stop sign” such that the claimed invention is realized. Frossard discloses an embodiment identifying that a sign post is synonymous with a stop sign. One of ordinary skill, apprised of these known features would have substituted the stop sign for the sign post and the results of the substation would have provided an embodiment meeting the claimed invention.
Claims 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira et al., U.S. 2021/0103287 in view of Pogula et al., U.S. 2018/0005522 and Wall, U.S. 2008/0086258 and Cross, U.S. 2012/0326891 (as evidenced by Gomez Gutierrez et al., U.S. 2018/0174448) and Frossard et al., U.S. 2019/0384994.
On claim 17, Shapira, Porgula, Wall, and Cross cites (as evidenced by Gutierrez):The system of claim 1, wherein said known object is a pole holding a signal light at intersections.
Cross cites:
[0034] For example, the locations and design of each marker means along the roadways, identification of each lane in the roadway from the intersection and for some distance out, say for example up to or beyond 2000 feet, each turn lane, parking space locations, major obstructions, such as buildings, trees, utility poles, sign posts, wires and the like which exist in the field of the camera's vision.
(The cited “utility poles” are known for holding a signal light as evidenced by Gutierrez):
[0076] FIG. 10 illustrates an example first traffic coordination location 1012, an example second traffic coordination location 1014, an example third traffic coordination location 1016, and an example fourth traffic coordination location example 1018 for the example first, second, third, and fourth UAVs 116, 118, 120, 132 at an example intersection 1020. The first traffic coordination location 1012 is a street light utility pole from which the first UAV 116 is stationed in a hanging position. The second traffic coordination location 1014 is a traffic signal utility pole that is inoperative (as denoted by “X” in the lamps of the traffic signal) from which the second UAV 118 is stationed in a hanging position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAL EUSTAQUIO whose telephone number is (571)270-7229. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-5pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Brian Zimmerman, can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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 lnformation 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 PAlR only. For more information about the PAlR system, see http:/lpair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAlR 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 800-786-91 99 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CAL J EUSTAQUIO/Examiner, Art Unit 2686
/BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights