CTNF 19/227,909 CTNF 99427 Detailed Office Action Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This is a non-final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and are addressed below. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim priority to KR10-2024-0171923 filed November 27, 2024. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/04/2026 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: while it is understood that the applicant defines the term “possibility” in Claim 1 and 11 as “possibility of pothole avoidance”, the return to the use of the generic term “possibility” in the dependent claims is unideal due to its common meaning being so generic, and thus leads to lack of clarity as currently drafted. It is advised that the applicant amend each use of the term “possibility” to include the full meaning of what the applicant intends possibility to mean: “possibility of pothole avoidance” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sholingar et al (US 20200160070 A1), hereafter referred to as Sholingar . Regarding Claim 1 , Sholingar teaches an apparatus of a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: one or more processors (see at least Sholingar [¶ 18] The computing device 115 includes a processor and a memory such as are known) a memory storing one or more programs (see at least Sholingar [¶ 18] Further, the memory includes one or more forms of computer-readable media, and stores instructions executable by the processor for performing various operations, including as disclosed herein) that, when executed by the one or more processors communicating with the memory, are configured to cause the apparatus to: estimate, based on a driving image of a preceding vehicle captured by a camera of the vehicle, a roll rate of the preceding vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 31, 37, 68] Determining distances and directions based on photogrammetry depends upon determining location and pose of traffic objects. Traffic objects are assumed to be rigid 3D objects (vehicles, etc.)...Location and pose can describe, respectively, the position and orientation (e.g., angles with respect to each of x, y, and z axes, possibly expressed, e.g., with respect to a vehicle, as a roll, pitch, and yaw) of traffic objects in real world 3D space...Cropped color image 300 and contextual information regarding the location and size of the cropped color image 300 with respect to original, uncropped color image 300 can be input to a DNN, described in relation to FIG. 4, below, to determine a pose prediction, i.e., estimated roll, pitch and yaw, for other vehicle 302…The pose data 710 (from pose data 610 b of training entries 608 or derived with the model 614 ) may be input to a derivative calculator 712 that calculates series of first derivatives of some or all of the x, y, z, pitch, yaw, and roll values of a series of pose estimates for each video segment) determine a possibility of a pothole avoidance, wherein the possibility is determined based on the roll rate of the preceding vehicle, driving information about the preceding vehicle, and driving information about the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 65, 78] The database 612 may further store a hazard model 616 trained to identify the type and/or location of a hazard based on change an observed vehicle's pose over time. The pose model 614 and hazard model 616 may be loaded onto a vehicle having some or all of the attributes of the vehicle 110 for purposes of identifying and avoiding hazards as discussed below...once the location and type of a hazard is identified, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may take actions to mitigate danger caused by the hazard. For example, where a hazard is classified as a pothole, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may swerve to avoid the location of the pothole or slow down if swerving is not possible) Because the disclosure in Sholingar discusses identifying pothole hazards and using the control algorithm to potentially avoid them, the disclosure teaches determining a possibility of pothole avoidance output a signal indicating the possibility (see at least Sholingar [¶ 79-80] the hazard type and location may be provided to the driver assistance algorithm 720. The driver assistance algorithm 720 may response to the type and location of the hazard by outputting an alert 814. For example, a voice alert may communicate the hazard and possibly its location to the driver (e.g., “pothole on left”)....the type and location of hazards may be communicated to a remote hazard database 820) control, based on the signal and based on an estimated pothole, autonomous driving of the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 78] once the location and type of a hazard is identified, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may take actions to mitigate danger caused by the hazard. For example, where a hazard is classified as a pothole, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may swerve to avoid the location of the pothole or slow down if swerving is not possible). Regarding Claim 11 , Sholingar teaches a method performed by an apparatus of a vehicle, the method comprising: estimating, based on a driving image of a preceding vehicle captured by a camera of the vehicle, a roll rate of the preceding vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 31, 37, 68] Determining distances and directions based on photogrammetry depends upon determining location and pose of traffic objects. Traffic objects are assumed to be rigid 3D objects (vehicles, etc.)...Location and pose can describe, respectively, the position and orientation (e.g., angles with respect to each of x, y, and z axes, possibly expressed, e.g., with respect to a vehicle, as a roll, pitch, and yaw) of traffic objects in real world 3D space...Cropped color image 300 and contextual information regarding the location and size of the cropped color image 300 with respect to original, uncropped color image 300 can be input to a DNN, described in relation to FIG. 4, below, to determine a pose prediction, i.e., estimated roll, pitch and yaw, for other vehicle 302…The pose data 710 (from pose data 610 b of training entries 608 or derived with the model 614 ) may be input to a derivative calculator 712 that calculates series of first derivatives of some or all of the x, y, z, pitch, yaw, and roll values of a series of pose estimates for each video segment) determining a possibility of a pothole avoidance, wherein the possibility is determined based on the roll rate of the preceding vehicle, driving information about the preceding vehicle, and driving information about the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 65, 78] The database 612 may further store a hazard model 616 trained to identify the type and/or location of a hazard based on change an observed vehicle's pose over time. The pose model 614 and hazard model 616 may be loaded onto a vehicle having some or all of the attributes of the vehicle 110 for purposes of identifying and avoiding hazards as discussed below...once the location and type of a hazard is identified, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may take actions to mitigate danger caused by the hazard. For example, where a hazard is classified as a pothole, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may swerve to avoid the location of the pothole or slow down if swerving is not possible) Because the disclosure in Sholingar discusses identifying pothole hazards and using the control algorithm to potentially avoid them, the disclosure teaches determining a possibility of pothole avoidance outputting a signal indicating the possibility (see at least Sholingar [¶ 79-80] the hazard type and location may be provided to the driver assistance algorithm 720. The driver assistance algorithm 720 may response to the type and location of the hazard by outputting an alert 814. For example, a voice alert may communicate the hazard and possibly its location to the driver (e.g., “pothole on left”)....the type and location of hazards may be communicated to a remote hazard database 820) controlling, based on the signal and based on an estimated pothole, autonomous driving of the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 78] once the location and type of a hazard is identified, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may take actions to mitigate danger caused by the hazard. For example, where a hazard is classified as a pothole, the autonomous control algorithm 718 may swerve to avoid the location of the pothole or slow down if swerving is not possible) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-3, 5, 6-10, 12-13, 15, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sholingar et al (US 20200160070 A1) in view of Okabe et al (JP 2024134709 A). Hereafter referred to as Sholingar and Okabe respectively . Regarding Claims 2 and 12 , Sholingar teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 11 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches estimating the roll rate of a preceding vehicle, it does not explicitly teach estimating the roll rate using a center line and angle change from that center line. Therefore, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to: identify, based on the driving image, a center line of the preceding vehicle, and estimate a first roll rate based on an angle change amount of the center line for each frame associated with the driving image of the preceding vehicle, and wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle comprises the first roll rate. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to: identify, based on the driving image, a center line of the preceding vehicle and estimate a first roll rate based on an angle change amount of the center line for each frame associated with the driving image of the preceding vehicle, wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle comprises the first roll rate (see at least Okabe [FIG. 9 and English Translation pg.6 para.6] As shown in FIG. 9 (3), the vehicle control device 33 may detect the inclination of the image of the preceding vehicle 2, and if the inclination exceeds a threshold, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring and set the threshold according to the curvature of the road. Since the centrifugal force generated on a curve is proportional to the vehicle speed, the vehicle control device 33 may set the threshold according to the curvature and the vehicle speed. The vehicle control device 33 may make the judgment based on the amount of change in the inclination rather than the inclination of the preceding vehicle 2 at each moment. For example, as shown in FIG. 9 (3), if the image of the preceding vehicle 2 continues to remain inclined, the vehicle control device 33 may not estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring because this is likely due to the influence of cargo being shifted to one side) The disclosure in Okabe discussed how a preceding vehicle’s roll angle is detected over time using a camera to determine the rate at which the vehicle is rolling. Further, it can be seen in FIG. 9 that a center line is used to denote the amount of angle change from the normal driving situation. PNG media_image1.png 496 430 media_image1.png Greyscale FIG. 9, Okabe et al (JP 2024134709 A) Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to: identify, based on the driving image, a center line of the preceding vehicle and estimate a first roll rate based on an angle change amount of the center line for each frame associated with the driving image of the preceding vehicle, wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle comprises the first roll rate with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the driving of the vehicle by using centerline and angle information to identify when a vehicle in front of the ego vehicle may be performing an evasive maneuver, indicating to the ego vehicle important safety information about future road conditions as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.6] the vehicle control device 33 may detect the inclination of the image of the preceding vehicle 2, and if the inclination exceeds a threshold, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring). Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 2 and the method of Claim 12 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches estimating the Yaw rate of a vehicle as one of the vehicle’s roll rates, it does not explicitly teach basing the second roll rate on both the yaw rate and the speed of the vehicle. Therefore, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to estimate a second roll rate based on a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle, and wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle further comprises the second roll rate. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to estimate a second roll rate based on a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle, and wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle further comprises the second roll rate (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.5-6] As shown in FIG. 9 (3), the vehicle control device 33 may detect the inclination of the image of the preceding vehicle 2, and if the inclination exceeds a threshold, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring and set the threshold according to the curvature of the road. Since the centrifugal force generated on a curve is proportional to the vehicle speed, the vehicle control device 33 may set the threshold according to the curvature and the vehicle speed. The vehicle control device 33 may make the judgment based on the amount of change in the inclination rather than the inclination of the preceding vehicle 2 at each moment. For example, as shown in FIG. 9 (3), if the image of the preceding vehicle 2 continues to remain inclined, the vehicle control device 33 may not estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring because this is likely due to the influence of cargo being shifted to one side…the leading vehicle 2 is yawing, so the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that this is an evasive maneuver). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to estimate a second roll rate based on a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle, and wherein the roll rate of the preceding vehicle further comprises the second roll rate with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the driving of the vehicle by using yaw angle information to identify when a vehicle in front of the ego vehicle may be performing an evasive maneuver, indicating to the ego vehicle important safety information about future road conditions as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.5] the outline is no longer a rectangle as shown in FIG. 9 (2), the leading vehicle 2 is yawing, so the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that this is an evasive maneuver). Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 3 and the method of Claim 13 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches determining the possibility of avoiding a pothole or road hazard using the preceding vehicle’s roll rate, it does not explicitly teach determining the possibility based on the entirety of the list described in Claims 5 and 15. Therefore, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the possibility based on: a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate a speed of the vehicle the speed of the preceding vehicle, a roll rate of the vehicle, and a steering angle of the vehicle. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the possibility (see at least Okabe [English Translation Abstract and pg.7 para.7] To provide a vehicle control method and a vehicle control device that can provide improved performance of avoiding an obstacle...The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver) based on: a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.7] As shown in FIG. 9 (4), when rolling and yawing are detected simultaneously, the vehicle control device 33 may replace the rolling angle and yawing angle individually with index values and compare the sum of the index values with a threshold value, or may compare the larger of the index values with a threshold value) a speed of the vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.2 para.8] Based on the situation judgment, the vehicle control device 33 controls the steering angle and vehicle speed) the speed of the preceding vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.3 para.4] The sensor control device 35 also obtains detection information such as the direction and relative speed of other vehicles 5 relative to the vehicle 1, based on information detected by the radar 20) a roll rate of the vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.31 para.5 and 14] When it is determined that the change amount of the roll angle or the yaw angle of the preceding vehicle exceeds a predetermined angle threshold value...When a change amount of a roll angle or a yaw angle of the preceding vehicle is large, the avoidance probability is evaluated higher than when the change amount of the roll angle or the yaw angle is small) a steering angle of the vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.2 para.8] Based on the situation judgment, the vehicle control device 33 controls the steering angle and vehicle speed). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the possibility based on: a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate, a speed of the vehicle, the speed of the preceding vehicle, a roll rate of the vehicle, and a steering angle of the vehicle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by including a plurality of vehicle parameters in the estimation of the hazard avoidance probability as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants). Regarding Claims 6 and 16 , Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 5 and the method of Claim 15 as set forth above. Sholingar further teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the possibility by inputting a plurality of input values into a trained learning model (see at least Sholingar [¶ 38, Abstract, and Claim 6] FIG. 4 is a diagram of an example pose prediction DNN 400, i.e., a machine learning program that can be trained to output predicted orientation 420 and predicted position 424 in response to an input color image 402...wherein training the second DNN to classify the hazard according to the training data entries and the vehicle pose estimates comprises training the second DNN to classify the hazard as at least one of a pothole...The model may be used by an autonomous vehicle to identify and avoid hazards) wherein the plurality of input values comprises at least two of: the first roll rate, the second roll rate, the difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate, the speed of the preceding vehicle, the speed of the vehicle, the roll rate of the vehicle, and the steering angle of the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 74, 37] The pose data 806 may be input to a machine learning algorithm 810 that processes the pose data 806 according to the hazard model 616. The machine learning algorithm may further take as inputs derivatives of the pose estimates from a derivative calculator 808. As discussed above, a pose estimate may include x, y, z, pitch, yaw, and roll... A pose prediction can be used by computing device 115 to predict movement for other vehicle 302 and thereby assist computing device 115 in safely and efficiently operating vehicle 110 by avoiding collisions and near-collisions and traveling a shortest path consistent with safe operation). Regarding Claim 7 and 17 , Sholingar teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 11 as set forth above. However, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility being less than a preset reference probability value. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility being less than a preset reference probability value (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.9 para.2-4, pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] when vehicle 1 is traveling in the passing lane of a two-lane expressway and an avoidance prediction is made, it is sufficient if vehicle 1 can change lanes into the driving lane to avoid avoidance target 3…When vehicle 1 attempts to change lanes to avoid a collision with an avoidance target 3 such as an obstacle… The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver… Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants) The disclosure in Okabe teaches determining the avoidance probability of an ahead object or hazard and additionally discloses performing lane changes as an evasive maneuver, therefore it would be obvious that any lane change maneuver would be based in the probability being below a predetermined threshold, as if the possibility of avoiding the obstacle is low, then a lane change would be ideal to increase the safety of the driving by attempting to avoid the object. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility being less than a preset reference probability value with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by estimating the hazard avoidance probability and performing a lane change to avoid such a hazard, as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants). Regarding Claims 8 and 18 , Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of Claim 3 as set forth above. However, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a preceding vehicle following strategy based on the first roll rate being less than a preset first reference value. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a preceding vehicle following strategy based on the first roll rate being less than a preset first reference value (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.4, pg.15 para.2, pg.13 para.2] when the image of the leading vehicle 2 is upright, the vehicle control device 33 estimates that the leading vehicle 2 is traveling straight and is not making any evasive maneuver….When traveling parallel to one or more vehicles in this way is unavoidable, acceleration and deceleration are controlled so that the front of vehicle 1 does not overlap with the nearby vehicle 6 in front, but rather follows the rear end of the nearby vehicle 6 in front...when there is no parallel vehicle 4, the vehicle control device 33 may set a speed policy (maintenance policy) of maintaining the speed or position rather than accelerating or decelerating. Speed control based on the maintenance policy includes speed maintenance, which maintains the current speed, and position maintenance, which maintains the relative position with other vehicles). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a preceding vehicle following strategy based on the first roll rate being less than a preset first reference value with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by maintaining regular straight driving when there is no detection of ahead danger or objects. Regarding Claim 9 , Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of Claim 3 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches lane change maneuvers to avoid a detected forward obstacle, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy or a lane line crossing strategy based on a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being less than a preset second reference value. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy or a lane line crossing strategy based on a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being less than a preset second reference value (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.7, pg.30 para.3, pg.9 para.2] As shown in FIG. 9 (4), when rolling and yawing are detected simultaneously, the vehicle control device 33 may replace the rolling angle and yawing angle individually with index values and compare the sum of the index values with a threshold value, or may compare the larger of the index values with a threshold value…FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of estimation of an avoidance operation based on the attitude of a leading vehicle…when vehicle 1 is traveling in the passing lane of a two-lane expressway and an avoidance prediction is made, it is sufficient if vehicle 1 can change lanes into the driving lane to avoid avoidance target 3). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy or a lane line crossing strategy based on a difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being less than a preset second reference value with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by including a plurality of vehicle and obstacle parameters in the estimation of the hazard avoidance probability and performing a lane change to avoid such a hazard, as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants). Regarding Claim 10 , Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of Claim 3 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches lane change maneuvers to avoid a detected forward obstacle, Sholingar does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility and based on the difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being greater than or equal to the preset second reference value. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility and based on the difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being greater than or equal to the preset second reference value (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.7, pg.30 para.3, pg.7 para.7, pg.9 para.2] As shown in FIG. 9 (4), when rolling and yawing are detected simultaneously, the vehicle control device 33 may replace the rolling angle and yawing angle individually with index values and compare the sum of the index values with a threshold value, or may compare the larger of the index values with a threshold value…FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of estimation of an avoidance operation based on the attitude of a leading vehicle…The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…when vehicle 1 is traveling in the passing lane of a two-lane expressway and an avoidance prediction is made, it is sufficient if vehicle 1 can change lanes into the driving lane to avoid avoidance target 3). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine the lane change strategy and a deflected driving strategy based on the possibility and based on the difference value between the first roll rate and the second roll rate being greater than or equal to the preset second reference value with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by including a plurality of vehicle and obstacle parameters in the estimation of the hazard avoidance probability and performing a lane change to avoid such a hazard, as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants). Regarding Claim 19 , Sholingar teaches an apparatus of a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: a processor (see at least Sholingar [¶ 18] The computing device 115 includes a processor and a memory such as are known) a memory storing at least one instruction (see at least Sholingar [¶ 18] Further, the memory includes one or more forms of computer-readable media, and stores instructions executable by the processor for performing various operations, including as disclosed herein) that, when executed by the processor communicating with the memory, is configured to cause the apparatus to: estimate a first roll rate of a preceding vehicle based on image data associated with the preceding vehicle obtained from a camera of the vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 31, 37, 68] Determining distances and directions based on photogrammetry depends upon determining location and pose of traffic objects. Traffic objects are assumed to be rigid 3D objects (vehicles, etc.)...Location and pose can describe, respectively, the position and orientation (e.g., angles with respect to each of x, y, and z axes, possibly expressed, e.g., with respect to a vehicle, as a roll, pitch, and yaw) of traffic objects in real world 3D space...Cropped color image 300 and contextual information regarding the location and size of the cropped color image 300 with respect to original, uncropped color image 300 can be input to a DNN, described in relation to FIG. 4, below, to determine a pose prediction, i.e., estimated roll, pitch and yaw, for other vehicle 302…The pose data 710 (from pose data 610 b of training entries 608 or derived with the model 614 ) may be input to a derivative calculator 712 that calculates series of first derivatives of some or all of the x, y, z, pitch, yaw, and roll values of a series of pose estimates for each video segment) estimate a second roll rate of the preceding vehicle based on motion information associated with the preceding vehicle (see at least Sholingar [¶ 31, 37, 68] Location and pose can describe, respectively, the position and orientation (e.g., angles with respect to each of x, y, and z axes, possibly expressed, e.g., with respect to a vehicle, as a roll, pitch, and yaw) of traffic objects in real world 3D space...Cropped color image 300 and contextual information regarding the location and size of the cropped color image 300 with respect to original, uncropped color image 300 can be input to a DNN, described in relation to FIG. 4, below, to determine a pose prediction, i.e., estimated roll, pitch and yaw, for other vehicle 302…The pose data 710 (from pose data 610 b of training entries 608 or derived with the model 614 ) may be input to a derivative calculator 712 that calculates series of first derivatives of some or all of the x, y, z, pitch, yaw, and roll values of a series of pose estimates for each video segment) The determined yaw rate is equivalent to a second roll rate. However, while Sholingar teaches determining a possibility of pothole avoidance using the first roll rate, it does not explicitly teach when executed by the processor communicating with the memory, is configured to cause the apparatus to: determine, based on the first roll rate and the second roll rate, a likelihood that the preceding vehicle encountered a road surface anomaly, output a signal indicating the likelihood, and control, based on the signal, autonomous driving of the vehicle. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches when executed by the processor communicating with the memory, is configured to cause the apparatus to: determine, based on the first roll rate and the second roll rate, a likelihood that the preceding vehicle encountered a road surface anomaly, output a signal indicating the likelihood (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.30 para.3, pg.6 para.7] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver. For example, if the preceding vehicle 2 starts to move rapidly lateral from a straight-ahead state, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that the steering wheel has been turned sharply, and therefore may evaluate the avoidance probability as high…FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of estimation of an avoidance operation based on the attitude of a leading vehicle…As shown in FIG. 9 (4), when rolling and yawing are detected simultaneously) and; control, based on the signal, autonomous driving of the vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.3 para.3] The vehicle control device 33 may then intervene in driving depending on the evaluated situation, and may autonomously control the speed and steering angle depending on the mode). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for when executed by the processor communicating with the memory, is configured to cause the apparatus to: determine, based on the first roll rate and the second roll rate, a likelihood that the preceding vehicle encountered a road surface anomaly, output a signal indicating the likelihood, and control, based on the signal, autonomous driving of the vehicle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by including a plurality of vehicle parameters in the estimation of the hazard avoidance probability as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants). Regarding Claim 20, Sholingar in view of Okabe teaches all limitations of Claim 19 as set forth above. However, Okabe does not explicitly teach wherein: the image data indicates a center line inclination of the preceding vehicle in successive image frames; the motion information comprises at least a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle; and the motion information is obtained by vehicle-to-vehicle communication with the preceding vehicle or obtained by a radar of the vehicle. Okabe, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the image data indicates a center line inclination of the preceding vehicle in successive image frames (see at least Okabe [FIG. 9 and English Translation pg.6 para.6] As shown in FIG. 9 (3), the vehicle control device 33 may detect the inclination of the image of the preceding vehicle 2, and if the inclination exceeds a threshold, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring and set the threshold according to the curvature of the road. Since the centrifugal force generated on a curve is proportional to the vehicle speed, the vehicle control device 33 may set the threshold according to the curvature and the vehicle speed. The vehicle control device 33 may make the judgment based on the amount of change in the inclination rather than the inclination of the preceding vehicle 2 at each moment. For example, as shown in FIG. 9 (3), if the image of the preceding vehicle 2 continues to remain inclined, the vehicle control device 33 may not estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring because this is likely due to the influence of cargo being shifted to one side) The disclosure in Okabe discussed how a preceding vehicle’s roll angle is detected over time using a camera to determine the rate at which the vehicle is rolling. Further, it can be seen in FIG. 9 that a center line is used to denote the amount of angle change from the normal driving situation wherein the motion information comprises at least a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.6 para.5-6] As shown in FIG. 9 (3), the vehicle control device 33 may detect the inclination of the image of the preceding vehicle 2, and if the inclination exceeds a threshold, the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that an evasive maneuver is occurring and set the threshold according to the curvature of the road. Since the centrifugal force generated on a curve is proportional to the vehicle speed, the vehicle control device 33 may set the threshold according to the curvature and the vehicle speed… the leading vehicle 2 is yawing, so the vehicle control device 33 may estimate that this is an evasive maneuver) wherein the motion information is obtained by vehicle-to-vehicle communication with the preceding vehicle or obtained by a radar of the vehicle (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.2 para.3-4, pg.4 para.6, pg.4 para.5] The front radar 21 detects obstacles in front of the vehicle 1…The forward radar 21 that scans ahead has a narrow scan range in order to quickly detect distant vehicles. The vehicle control device 33 uses the detection information of the forward radar 21 that scans ahead for the forward collision prevention function…When the front radar 21, right side radar 22, and left side radar 23 are not differentiated, they are referred to as radars 20…the radar 20 identifies the approach speed of the reflector C. Since the approach speed is determined by the difference in speed between the vehicle 1 and the reflector C, the sensor control device 35 identifies the speed of the reflector C by offsetting the speed of the vehicle 1 from the approach speed. In other words, the radar 20 can identify the position and speed of the reflector C). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in Sholingar to contain a system for wherein: the image data indicates a center line inclination of the preceding vehicle in successive image frames; the motion information comprises at least a yaw rate of the preceding vehicle and a speed of the preceding vehicle; and the motion information is obtained by vehicle-to-vehicle communication with the preceding vehicle or obtained by a radar of the vehicle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle by including a plurality of vehicle parameters in the estimation of the hazard avoidance probability as discussed in Okabe (see at least Okabe [English Translation pg.7 para.7, pg.24 para.2] The vehicle control device 33 may evaluate the avoidance probability by quantifying the degree of conformance with the conditions (estimation conditions) for estimating that the lateral movement of the preceding vehicle 2 is an evasive maneuver…Avoidance preparation operations and avoidance operations are performed under urgent circumstances with the aim of protecting the safety of the occupants) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sholingar et al (US 20200160070 A1) in view of He et al (US 20240190421 A1). Hereafter referred to as Sholingar and He respectively . Regarding Claims 4 and 14 , Sholingar teaches all limitations of the apparatus of Claim 1 and the method of Claim 11 as set forth above. However, while Sholingar teaches executing a lane change strategy based on determined hazards (see at least Sholingar [¶ 22, 47-48] it does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy based on the possibility being greater than or equal to a preset reference probability value. He, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy based on the possibility being greater than or equal to a preset reference probability value (see at least He [¶ 43-44] in the case that the category of the road surface damage is a pothole and the category confidence level is greater than a second threshold, the road surface degree of the road surface damage is level 1….In the case that the damage degree of the road surface damage is level 1, adjusting the autonomous driving strategy may comprise avoidance (for example, changing lanes) or deceleration). Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in He to contain a system for wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to determine a lane change strategy based on the possibility being greater than or equal to a preset reference probability value with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the safety of the vehicle as discussed in He (see at least He [Abstract] The autonomous driving control method for the vehicle can detect potholes or cracks in front of road accurately in real time and adjust the autonomous driving strategy based on a detection result, ensuring safety of passenger in the vehicle and improving passenger experience during the autonomous driving process). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A YANOSKA whose telephone number is (703)756-5891. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am to 5:00pm (Pacific Time). 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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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. /JOSEPH ANDERSON YANOSKA/Examiner, Art Unit 3664 /RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 2 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 3 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 4 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 5 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 6 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 7 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 8 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 9 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 10 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 11 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 12 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 13 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 14 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 15 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 16 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 17 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 18 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 19 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 20 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 21 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 22 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 23 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 19/227,909 Page 24 Art Unit: 3664
Prosecution Insights