DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-9 are pending in Instant Application.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of International Patent Application No. PCT/JP2023/043636 filed on December 6, 2023, which claims priority to and the benefit of Japanese Patent Application No. 2022-195843 filed on December 7, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 05/20/2025 and 11/07/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed 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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The analysis of the claims’ subject matter eligibility will follow the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50-57 (January 7, 2019) (“2019 PEG”).
With respect to claims 1 and 7-9.
Claims 1 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 Analysis: Claims 1 and 7-9 are directed to one of the statutory categories.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: the claim recites, inter alia:
“generating a reference route indicating a route from a position of the moving body on which the moving body travels”: A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally and/or physically generate a route. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes. “determining a part of the reference route to be referred to for controlling travel of the moving body out of the reference route": A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally and/or physically determine a route section. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.
"determining a control amount for controlling travel of the moving body with reference to the determined part of the reference route": A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally and/or physically determine control amount to used. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes. “determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing": A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally and/or physically determine a route section. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.
as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) but for the recitation of generic computer components. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites additional elements that are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional element of the “control system” and “processors” are recited at a high level of generality, and comprises only a processor to simply perform the generic computer functions. Generic computers performing generic computer functions, alone, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The generic computer components in these steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer component performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B Analysis: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using generic computer components to perform the abstract idea amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. Here, the communication step is considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, and thus they are re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The background recites that the communication module is conventional transmitter/receiver mounted on the vehicle, and the specification does not provide any indication that this is anything other than a conventional computer within a vehicle. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Further, the Federal Circuit in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function. Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer. Thus, the claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims: Dependent claims(s) 2-6 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because the dependent claims do not provide any control aspect for actually controlling the moving body other than the same determination of a control amount. The control amount is not further provided to actually be applied to the moving body. Therefore, dependent claims 2-6 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of claims 1 and 7-9. Therefore, claim(s) 1-9 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
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.
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(a) 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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsuhata et al. (USPGPub 2024/0168495) in view of Hattori (US 5,229,941). As per claim 1, Mitsuhata discloses a moving body control system that controls an operation of a moving body, the moving body control system comprising: one or more processors (see at least paragraph 0031; item 50); and a memory storing instructions which, when the instructions are executed by the one or more processors (see at least paragraph 0031), cause the moving body control system to perform: generating a reference route indicating a route from a position of the moving body on which the moving body travels (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 generates the travel route that is in response to the travel pattern (reciprocating mowing or turn mowing) selected in accordance with the operation of the mobile terminal 53 or the like); determining a part of the reference route to be referred to for controlling travel of the moving body out of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 sets a start position for starting the autonomous mowing travel and an end position for ending the autonomous mowing travel); and determining a control amount for controlling travel of the moving body with reference to the determined part of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0042; wherein when the autonomous travel mode is being set, the autonomous travel control part 62 controls the powering part 8 and the travel part 2 based on the travel setting of the travel route created by the travel route creating part 61, thereby to cause the autonomous travel, which is in response to the travel route, to be executed). Mitsuhata does not explicitly mention wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing. However Hattori does disclose: wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Hattori with the teachings as in Mitsuhata. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an autonomous vehicle for automatically running on a route of travel, in which the vehicle can run smoothly according to a shape of the route of travel, see Hattori column 1 lines 61-65. As per claim 2, Hattori discloses wherein the first identification processing includes identifying the terminal end of the straight line forming the reference route on the basis of a coincidence degree between the reference route and a straight line from a specific point on the reference route to the moving body (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). As per claim 3, Hattori discloses wherein the first identification processing includes identifying the terminal end of the straight line forming the reference route on the basis of deviation from a straight line indicating a current advancing direction of the moving body (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). As per claim 4, Hattori discloses wherein the first identification processing includes both a first process based on a coincidence degree between the reference route and a straight line from a specific point on the reference route to the moving body, and a second process based on deviation from a straight line indicating a current advancing direction of the moving body, and identifying a terminal end distant from the moving body as a terminal end of the straight line (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). As per claim 5, Hattori discloses wherein the second identification processing includes identifying a terminal end of a curved line forming the reference route on the basis of a change in curvature of a circular arc passing through a plurality of positions on the reference route (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). As per claim 6, Hattori discloses wherein the instructions further cause the moving body control system to perform recognizing a travel region for generating the reference route on the basis of an image obtained by capturing an external field of the moving body (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein The run control unit 500 shown in FIG. 1 determines properly the road information in the forward direction of the vehicle detected by the image processing unit 100 and detecting unit 200 and drives and controls the actuator control unit 300 to run the vehicle toward the destination inputted from an interface unit 600, referring to the information derived from the information storage unit 400). As per claim 7, Mitsuhata discloses a moving body comprising: one or more processors (see at least paragraph 0031; item 50); and a memory storing instructions which, when the instructions are executed by the one or more processors (see at least paragraph 0031), cause the moving body control system to perform: generating a reference route indicating a route from a position of the moving body on which the moving body travels (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 generates the travel route that is in response to the travel pattern (reciprocating mowing or turn mowing) selected in accordance with the operation of the mobile terminal 53 or the like); determining a part of the reference route to be referred to for controlling travel of the moving body out of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 sets a start position for starting the autonomous mowing travel and an end position for ending the autonomous mowing travel); and determining a control amount for controlling travel of the moving body with reference to the determined part of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0042; wherein when the autonomous travel mode is being set, the autonomous travel control part 62 controls the powering part 8 and the travel part 2 based on the travel setting of the travel route created by the travel route creating part 61, thereby to cause the autonomous travel, which is in response to the travel route, to be executed). Mitsuhata does not explicitly mention wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a terminal end distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing. However Hattori does disclose: wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a terminal end distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Hattori with the teachings as in Mitsuhata. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an autonomous vehicle for automatically running on a route of travel, in which the vehicle can run smoothly according to a shape of the route of travel, see Hattori column 1 lines 61-65. As per claim 8, Mitsuhata discloses a control method of a moving body control system that controls an operation of a moving body, the control method comprising: generating a reference route indicating a route from a position of the moving body on which the moving body travels (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 generates the travel route that is in response to the travel pattern (reciprocating mowing or turn mowing) selected in accordance with the operation of the mobile terminal 53 or the like); determining a part of the reference route to be referred to for controlling travel of the moving body out of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 sets a start position for starting the autonomous mowing travel and an end position for ending the autonomous mowing travel); and determining a control amount for controlling travel of the moving body with reference to the determined part of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0042; wherein when the autonomous travel mode is being set, the autonomous travel control part 62 controls the powering part 8 and the travel part 2 based on the travel setting of the travel route created by the travel route creating part 61, thereby to cause the autonomous travel, which is in response to the travel route, to be executed). Mitsuhata does not explicitly mention wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing. However Hattori does disclose: wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Hattori with the teachings as in Mitsuhata. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an autonomous vehicle for automatically running on a route of travel, in which the vehicle can run smoothly according to a shape of the route of travel, see Hattori column 1 lines 61-65. As per claim 9, Mitsuhata discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for performing a control method of a moving body control system that controls an operation of a moving body, the control method comprising: generating a reference route indicating a route from a position of the moving body on which the moving body travels (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 generates the travel route that is in response to the travel pattern (reciprocating mowing or turn mowing) selected in accordance with the operation of the mobile terminal 53 or the like); determining a part of the reference route to be referred to for controlling travel of the moving body out of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0041; wherein the travel route creating part 61 sets a start position for starting the autonomous mowing travel and an end position for ending the autonomous mowing travel); and determining a control amount for controlling travel of the moving body with reference to the determined part of the reference route (see at least paragraph 0042; wherein when the autonomous travel mode is being set, the autonomous travel control part 62 controls the powering part 8 and the travel part 2 based on the travel setting of the travel route created by the travel route creating part 61, thereby to cause the autonomous travel, which is in response to the travel route, to be executed). Mitsuhata does not explicitly mention wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing. However Hattori does disclose: wherein determining the part of the reference route includes determining a part of the reference route so as to include a position distant from the position of the moving body out of a terminal end of a straight line forming the reference route identified by first identification processing, and a terminal end or a change point of a predetermined curvature of a curved line forming the reference route identified by second identification processing (see at least column 7 lines 48-63; wherein the general run control block 15 determines a general run command based on a general run control rule according to the shape of the route determined in the step 33. The general control rule is set as ten kinds of rules (Rule), as shown in FIGS. 8(A) to 8(J), according to the shape of the route. Rules 1 to 3 are applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road via the curved road. Rules 4 to 6 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the branched point. Rules 7 to 9 are applied to cases where the vehicle moves from the straight road to the straight road including the passage of the intersection(s). Rule 10 is applied to a case where the vehicle moves from the curved road to the curved road). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Hattori with the teachings as in Mitsuhata. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an autonomous vehicle for automatically running on a route of travel, in which the vehicle can run smoothly according to a shape of the route of travel, see Hattori column 1 lines 61-65.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: USPGPub 2021/0300470 – Provide a traveling route generation device generating a traveling route along which a vehicle travels and a vehicle control device performing traveling control of the vehicle so that the vehicle travels along the traveling route generated by the traveling route generation device. USPGPub 2019/0227561 – Provide an autonomous travel work vehicle 1 including: a body part (2); a work machine (24) attached to the body part; a moving GPS antenna (34) configured to detect positional information on the body part; a memory (309) configured to store a field (H) where the body part travels; a control section (30) configured to control travel of the body part and work by the work machine in the field (H); and a remote control device 112 that generates a route (R) of the body part in the field (H). The control section is configured to cause the body part to travel from a current position (Z) to a work start point (Sw) and then start work with the work machine in a case where an instruction of start of work with the work machine is issued in a headland (HB).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHMOUD S ISMAIL whose telephone number is (571)272-1326. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00AM- 4:00PM.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/MAHMOUD S ISMAIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights