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 . Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. This action is in response to the claims filed 5/8/25.
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 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.
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 12-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Grossheim (US 2023/0033041).
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Grossheim discloses a method for operating an autonomous vehicle including a method/system/non-transitory computer readable medium for controlling an autonomous vehicle without a driver (Abstract), the system comprising
an autonomous driving control system including one or more processors configured to operate the autonomous vehicle autonomously without a driver; and a steering system including one or more processors configured to (¶19-21 and ¶25 - automatic and/or autonomous control of a direction of travel of the vehicle corresponding to the recited operate the autonomous vehicle autonomously without a driver using an autonomous driving control system/steering system including a control unit corresponding to the recited processors):
receive a steering control command generated by the autonomous driving control system, the steering control command identifying a steering control position; control an orientation of one or more wheels of the autonomous vehicle according to the steering control position (¶21-24 – control unit controls the steering actuator to provide autonomous control of a direction of travel of the vehicle corresponding to the recited steering control command generated by the autonomous driving control system to a steering angle characteristic parameter corresponding to the recited steering control position);
determine that the steering system has not received a valid steering control command generated by the autonomous driving control system for more than a predetermined duration since the steering control command was received (¶9-10 – when the autonomous driving system is in a faulty operating state for a predetermined period of time corresponding to the recited steering system has not received a valid steering control command generated by the autonomous driving control system for more than a predetermined duration since the steering control command was received); and
in response to the determination, continue to control the orientation of the one or more wheels by maintaining the steering control position of the steering control command and ignoring other steering control commands generated by the autonomous driving control system (¶9-10 and ¶31-32 - when the autonomous driving system is in a faulty operating state for a predetermined period of time, a replacement signal for the steering sensor signal is determined using already existing operating signals of the vehicle to continue operations in a degraded state corresponding to the recited continue to control the orientation of the one or more wheels by maintaining the steering control position of the steering control command while transitioning from automated driving mode to manual driving mode therefore only utilizing the replacement signal derived from the current wheel steering angle corresponding to the recited maintaining steering control and ignoring other steering control commands from the autonomous driving control system).
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Grossheim further discloses wherein the steering control command is a last control command received before the predetermined duration (¶9-10 - wheel steering angle characteristic parameter can be determined in particular based on a rack and pinion position, based on a rotor position signal of the steering actuator, based on a deflection of the steering control, based on a steering angle at the steering control which continues through the predetermined period of time while operating in a faulty operating state corresponding to the recited last control command received before the predetermined duration).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Grossheim further discloses wherein the predetermined duration is a fixed period of time (¶9 - the termination process may also have a predetermined and/or predeterminable period of time corresponding to the recited fixed period of time).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 19, Grossheim further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to ignore steering control commands during the predetermined duration that include at least one of an invalid alive counter, an invalid checksum, or an invalid signal (¶9-10 – the vehicle continues to operate in a degraded state utilizing the wheel steering angle characteristic parameter until a manual takeover occurs corresponding to the recited ignoring all control steering commands from the automated driving system therefore including at least one of an invalid alive counter, an invalid checksum, or an invalid signal).
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Grossheim further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to, after receiving the steering control command, determine whether a valid steering control command generated by the autonomous driving control system has been received during a second predetermined duration of time, the second predetermined duration of time being shorter than the first predetermined duration of time (¶9-10 – automated driving mode in a faulty operating state delays the transition to manual driving for a short time depending on the wheel steering angle characteristic which has different predetermined and/or predeterminable periods of time based on the wheel steering angle characteristic therefore disclosing multiple predetermined durations of time with which a valid command is sought which is longer with larger steering angles).
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 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.
Claims 3, 10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossheim (US 2023/0033041), as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, in view of Katrak et al. (US 2008/0306654).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Grossheim does not explicitly disclose the predetermined durations is a fixed number of message cycles, however Katrak discloses a parametric remedial action strategy for an active front steer system including wherein the predetermined duration is a fixed number of message cycles (¶62-66 - checks whether the incorrect message count indicates a count that is greater than or equal to a specified number (for example, three) of consecutive incorrect messages where specified number of consecutive incorrect messages corresponding to the recited fixed number of message cycles without a valid command).
The combination of the autonomous driving fault recovery system of Grossheim with the determined message count error determination of Katrak fully discloses the elements as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have combined the autonomous driving fault recovery system of Grossheim with the determined message count error determination of Katrak in order to reduce the probability of false failure detection, and accurately detect actual failures during steering control (Katrak - ¶67).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
While the art of record does disclose utilizing different measures for determining an error in steering controls as well as other errors involved with autonomous driving, none of the art of record either alone or in combination explicitly utilizes a fixed number of message cycles corresponds to a base transmit rate of the autonomous driving control system with a multiplier or offset to monitor valid/invalid steering control command as claimed.
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yanaka et al. (US 2005/0205311) discloses a motor vehicle control device including determining failure of a reaction force applied to a steering control apparatus (Abstract).
Naga et al. (US 2023/0311910) discloses a communications method for a vehicle including utilizing a threshold number of subsequent messages to determine different conflicting situations (¶55-59).
Ahn et al. (US 2020/0189655) discloses a hands-on steering detection system including utilizing an accumulated number counter to determine the present state of the detection system (¶83-92).
Stark et al. (US 2019/0092341) discloses an autonomous driving mode transition system in which commands may be determined improper and invalid and will be ignored (¶50).
Nilson et al. (US 2018/0229738) discloses a safety stoppage device including to determine any brake system or steering system faults requiring an action by the autonomous drive-control unit, such as handover of control of the autonomous road vehicle to a driver thereof or provision of a degraded autonomous control mode, such as a degraded autonomous control mode allowing autonomous travel with reduced velocity, and further that, if the required action has not already been taken by the autonomous drive-control unit within a predetermined time period Δt following determination of such a fault, the brake-control and steering-control units are arranged or configured to control the wheel brakes to perform braking to a stop and the active steering actuator to follow the lateral control trajectory (¶27).
Hecker et al. (US 2017/0267221) discloses a fault detection system in which further requests subsequent to the detection of the failure are ignored and not implemented by the autopilot device (¶132).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Reda whose telephone number is (408)918-7573. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7-4 ET.
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 on (571) 272-7298. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/MATTHEW J. REDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights