DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 received on 06/26/2025 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-15 are pending for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/26/2025 and 04/01/2026 are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the processor should read the at least one processor.
Claims 2-3, 6 and 9-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: the determination area should read the predetermined determination area.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2 and 6 of copending Application No. 19/250,121 (hereinafter ‘121) in view of MAEJIMA (US 20230382370 A1).
Table has been created to compare claims 1 and 9-10 of the instant application and 1, 2 and 6 ‘121 side-by-side. All matching elements of the claim limitations appear in bold while non-matching elements of the claim limitations are not bolded.
Instant Invention (App. No. 19/250,117)
Copending Application (App. No. 19/250,121)
1. A vehicle control device comprising at least one processor configured to perform travel control for moving a vehicle to a target position and to transition between a first travel mode and a second travel mode, the at least one processor configured to:
determine, in response to the vehicle entering a predetermined determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, a travel condition in the second travel mode,
perform a first notification prompting a user to perform an approval operation for transitioning to the second travel mode in response to determining that the travel condition is satisfied, and
transition to the second travel mode in response to the approval operation being received.
1. A vehicle control device comprising: at least one processor configured to perform travel control for moving a vehicle to a target position and to transition between a first travel mode and a second travel mode, […] the at least one processor is configured to
determine, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, a travel condition in the second travel mode,
[…]
a predetermined matching condition, transition, in response to determining that the travel condition is satisfied and the vehicle enters the travelable area, to the second travel mode, and
cause the vehicle to travel in the second travel mode […].
9. The vehicle control device according to claim 5, wherein
the map information is map information on a region including the determination area and a travelable area where traveling in the second travel mode is possible, and
the at least one processor transitions to the second travel mode when the approval operation is received and the vehicle enters the travelable area.
1. a storage unit configured to store map information, wherein the map information is map information on a region including a predetermined determination area and a travelable area where traveling in the second travel mode is possible, and the at least one processor is configured to […] transition, in response to determining that the travel condition is satisfied and the vehicle enters the travelable area, to the second travel mode
10. The vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein
the travel condition includes at least one of conditions whether a state in which a travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area exceeds a first speed does not continue for a predetermined time or more, and whether a travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area does not exceed a second speed.
6. The vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein the travel condition includes at least one of condition whether a state in which a travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area exceeds a first speed does not continue for a predetermined time or more, and condition whether the travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area does not exceed a second speed.
Regarding claim 1, ‘121 fails to specifically teach perform a first notification prompting a user to perform an approval operation for transitioning to the second travel mode.
However, in the same field of endeavor, MAEJIMA teaches perform a first notification prompting a user to perform an approval operation for transitioning to the second travel mode (FIG. 9; para. [0101]-[0103]: “In Step 750, the CPU notifies the driver that the start condition is satisfied by performing various types of display on the display 25a. […] FIG. 9, the start condition is satisfied, and the parking assist control can be started immediately (that is, at the current position). For this reason, the message “Assist can be started” (assist-available message) is displayed as the message M1. The message M2 is a message to alert the driver.”).
‘121 and MAEJIMA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating a mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘121to incorporate the teachings of MAEJIMA and prompting a user to perform an approval operation in response to a triggering condition. Doing so would enhance user experience by informing an user prior to activating a driving mode, thus preventing unwanted transition.
Regarding claim 4, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether a route to the target position includes a region in which the vehicle is allowed to travel in the second travel mode (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0066]: “The parking assist mode is a mode in which “control of parking an own vehicle in a registered parking position by automatically moving the own vehicle along a registered path” and “control of parking the own vehicle in the registered parking position by assisting the own vehicle to move along the registered path” are executed as parking assist control.”).
Regarding claim 5, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches further comprising: a storage unit configured to store map information (FIG. 4-5; Claim 1: “register a group of position coordinates of the relative positions of the vehicle with respect to a predetermined reference point in a storage device as the registered path together with a position coordinate of the feature point and a position coordinate of the three-dimensional object with respect to the predetermined reference point”; para. [0085]: “CPU advances the process to Step 465, and stores (registers) the GPS position and the GPS azimuth at the registration start position in the ROM of the ECU 10 as the registered GPS position and the registered GPS azimuth. In addition, the CPU stores (registers) a group of the position coordinates of the own vehicle V (group of the position coordinates on a path R from the origin O to a point Pr via a point Pc) as a registered path Rreg in the ROM. Further, the CPU stores (registers) the feature point information and (the group of) the position coordinates of the three-dimensional objects in the ROM.”), wherein
the vehicle includes an external environment recognition unit configured to perform external environment recognition (para. [0050]: “Each camera sensor 11 acquires image data (image information) by photographing an area corresponding to a photographing region.”; para. [0092]: “the camera sensors 11. In addition, the CPU acquires the positions (relative positions with respect to the own vehicle V) of the three-dimensional objects”), and
the at least one processor is configured to cause the vehicle to travel in the second travel mode based on the map information stored in the storage unit and external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0092]-[0096]: “The CPU then advances the process to Step 720, and generates the specific overhead view images based on the overhead view image data generated through use of the image data transmitted from the camera sensors 1 […] calculates the registered path Rreg based on the position coordinates”; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg.”, para. [0119]: “three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered. Therefore, the parking assist control can be started even in the middle of the registered path, and hence the convenience of the parking assist control is further improved”, wherein the parking assist control is performed based on stored path data and reference points based on objects which are detected by the camera).
Regarding claim 6, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 5. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit in the determination area and the map information stored in the storage unit satisfy a predetermined matching condition (FIG. 7A; para. [0094]: “the CPU advances the process to Step 730, and determines whether or not a feature point F and/or a registered three-dimensional object have/has been detected. […] the position coordinates having a matching degree equal to or more than the matching degree threshold value, the CPU determines that a registered three-dimensional object has been detected”; Abstract: “storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information, calculates, when a feature point and a three-dimensional object are detected”).
Regarding claim 7, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 5. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the storage unit stores map information based on the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit during past traveling of the vehicle (para. [0011]: “not only the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path (a group of the position coordinates of the relative positions of the vehicle with respect to the reference point) are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered”; Abstract: “registers in a storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information”).
Regarding claim 8, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 7. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the storage unit stores a route during past traveling of the vehicle and the map information based on the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit during the past traveling in association with each other (Abstract: “registers in a storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information, calculates, when a feature point and a three-dimensional object are detected, the registered path based on the positions of the feature point and the three-dimensional object”; para. [0119: “not only the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered”), and
the at least one processor is configured to cause the vehicle to travel in the second travel mode based on map information corresponding to a travel route of the vehicle among the map information stored in the storage unit and the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0092]-[0096]: “The CPU then advances the process to Step 720, and generates the specific overhead view images based on the overhead view image data generated through use of the image data transmitted from the camera sensors 1 […] calculates the registered path Rreg based on the position coordinates”; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg.”, para. [0119]: “three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered. Therefore, the parking assist control can be started even in the middle of the registered path, and hence the convenience of the parking assist control is further improved”, wherein the parking assist control is performed based on stored path data and reference points based on objects which are detected by the camera).).
Regarding claim 9, MAEJIMA further teaches when the approval operation is received and the vehicle enters the travelable area (FIG.9; FIG. 11; FIG. 12; para. [0107]-[0108]: “Then, the CPU advances the process to Step 755, and determines whether or not the start button B has been pressed. When the start button B has not been pressed (“No” in Step 755), the CPU determines that the driver does not wish to start the parking assist control, and returns the process to Step 705. Meanwhile, when the start button B has been pressed (“Yes” in Step 755), the CPU determines that the driver wishes to start the parking assist control, and advances the process to Step 760 […] In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg”).
Regarding claim 11, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform control for parking the vehicle at the target position in the second travel mode (FIG. 8; FIG. 7B 760: “Start parking assist control”).
Regarding claim 14, it recites a method claim comprising claim limitations similar to those performed by the vehicle control device according to claim 1, and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 15, MAEJIMA further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a control program for a vehicle control device, the vehicle control device including at least one processor configured to perform travel control for moving a vehicle to a target position and to transition between a first travel mode and a second travel mode and, the control program causing the at least one processor to execute processing (FIG. 7A-7B; para. [0047]: “The CPU implements various functions by executing instructions (programs and routines) stored in the ROM. A part of those functions may be executed by another ECU (not shown).”, wherein ROM corresponds to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium) comprising claim limitations similar to those performed by the vehicle control device according to claim 1, and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA, and further in view of WALTER (DE 102022126726 A1).
A PE2E English Translation of WALTER cited by the Examiner is attached.
Regarding claim 2, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, the at least one processor performs deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition and performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control (para. [0159]: “The present invention can also be applied to a vehicle traveling by autonomous driving (by autonomous driving control)”; para. [0088]: “The parking assist mode becomes available for use when the path R is registered in the registration mode. The parking assist mode is constantly maintained in the active state during a period in which the own vehicle V is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed threshold value (for example, 30 km/h).”), but fails to specifically teach performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control.
However, in the same field of endeavor, WALTER teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (pg 3 5th paragraph: “The one or more parking intention indicators may be or include, for example: […] the vehicle is on a residential street and/or a street with parking facilities. […] - The motor vehicle is located near his home address. - There is good parking on the current road. - The motor vehicle is located near a navigation destination of the vehicle's navigation system. - In the past, parking was often done near the current location”), performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control (pg 3 last paragraph: “The driver is preferably also informed about the reduction of driving speed to the parking space search speed and/or the parking space search described below, for example by displaying a corresponding text (e.g. "Speed is reduced to search for a parking space") or a suitable symbol”).
WALTER is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of WALTER and inform the driver of a speed reduction in response to detection of parking intent or triggering condition. Doing so would enhance user experience by informing an user of a reason of speed reduction (WALTER pg 3 last paragraph), which is necessary in order to activate parking assist mode.
Claim 3 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA, and further in view of TSUJINO (US20200398826A1).
Regarding claim 3, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (para. [0090]: “determines whether or not the own vehicle V is traveling near the registered GPS position based on the GPS position calculated in Step 705 (in other words, whether or nota difference between the GPS position and the registered GPS position is equal to or less than a predetermined difference threshold value)”), deceleration of the vehicle for determining the travel condition (para. [0088]-[0089]: “The parking assist mode is constantly maintained in the active state during a period in which the own vehicle V is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed threshold value (for example, 30 km/h) […] Therefore, when the vehicle speed drops to the vehicle speed threshold value or lower in a case in which the path R is registered, the parking assist mode is started in Step 700 of FIG. 7A”), but fails to specifically teach wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, the processor performs a third notification prompting the user to perform deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition.
However, in the same field of endeavor, TSUJINO teaches in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (para. [0066]: “the analysis of the detection result of the external environment sensor 7 (more specifically, by the analysis of the images captured by the external cameras 19 based on a known image analysis method such as pattern matching), the external environment recognizing unit 41 can acquire, for example, a lane on a road delimited by road signs and a parking space delimited by white lines and the like provided on a surface of a road, a parking lot,”), the processor performs a third notification prompting the user to perform deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition (para. [0025]: “when the vehicle is traveling at the first predetermined value or higher, […] the occupant is prompted to reduce the vehicle speed so that the parking position candidates can be detected at a low vehicle speed where the detection accuracy is high”; para. [0132]: “At this time, the action plan unit 43 may preferably display a notification on the touch panel 32 such as […] “Slow down.”).
TSUJINO is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of TSUJINO and inform the driver to reduce speed in response to detection of parking area. Doing so would enhance user experience by informing a user to reduce speed in order to activate parking assist mode.
Claim 12 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA, and further in view of HIRATA (US 20200140011 A1).
Regarding claim 12, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1, but fails to specifically teach wherein the travel condition includes whether a state of a device of the vehicle used in the second travel mode is normal.
However, in the same field of endeavor, HIRATA teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether a state of a device of the vehicle used in the second travel mode is normal (para. [0097]: “The parking assistance unit 44 constantly performs a determination process of determining whether the parking assistance start condition is satisfied during the parking available area search mode (S1300). The parking assistance start condition is a condition for determining whether guidance by automatic steering may be started. For example, it may be a condition for determining whether the vehicle speed is sufficiently reduced (for example, whether the vehicle speed is 1 to 2 km/h or less), whether there are any abnormalities in various sensors and various actuators, or the like. In the support start condition determination process, when parking assistance start conditions are not met, for example, when the vehicle speed is not sufficiently reduced, or a sensor is abnormal, the parking assistance unit 44 invalidates the input of the operation unit 14g that accepts an operation for requesting the parking assistance, and puts the parking assistance on hold”).
HIRATA is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of HIRATA and further include checking whether a sensor is abnormal as a starting condition. Doing so would enhance safety by ensuring devices needed to perform parking assist control is normal, and thus prevent accidents which may occur due to abnormal device.
Claim 13 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA, and further in view of Tzempetzis (US 20200254998 A1).
Regarding claim 13, ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the first travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway (para. [0159]: “The present invention can also be applied to a vehicle traveling by autonomous driving (by autonomous driving control).”, wherein autonomous driving indicates manual driving and thus indicates traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway in order to reach the destination/parking area), and the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a (FIG. 8 para. [0002]: “the registered parking position being a parking position (parking space) of the vehicle registered in advance”), but fails to specifically teach the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a private land.
However, Tzempetzis teaches wherein the first travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a private land (para. [0041]: “the computing unit of the parking assistance device 2 and therefore the parking system 2 itself will not permit or carry out the driverless parking starting from the initial position 5 but rather, for example, in the present case inform the driver that the corresponding function cannot yet be activated and that he must still retain control over the motor vehicle 1, for example in a partially assisted driving mode, until the private section 14 is reached.; para. [0031]: “to enable and/or carry out driverless parking of the motor vehicle along the parking trajectory exclusively in a section of the checked parking trajectory which runs over private land”; para. [0029]: “public land comprises a public roadway and in particular the private land comprises a private roadway”, wherein manual mode must be maintained in public land, while parking assist may only be activated in private lands).
Tzempetzis is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘121 in view of MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of Tzempetzis and further include performing parking assist in a private land. Doing so would enhance safety by preventing parking assist from entering to public road traffic area, and thus preventing irritating other participants in public road traffic and correspondingly causing congestion or even an accident (Tzempetzis, para. [0012]).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MAEJIMA (US 20230382370 A1).
MAEJIMA is cited in the IDS received on 04/01/2026.
Regarding claim 1, MAEJIMA teaches a vehicle control device comprising at least one processor configured to perform travel control for moving a vehicle to a target position (FIG. 8; para. [0009]: “predetermined start position (P1) to a predetermined parking position (P3) as a registered path (Rreg), and parking the vehicle in the predetermined parking position (Pr) by automatically moving the vehicle along the registered path (Rreg),”; para. [0032]: “by the CPU in a parking assist mode”) and to transition between a first travel mode and a second travel mode (para. [0159]: “The present invention can also be applied to a vehicle traveling by autonomous driving (by autonomous driving control)”; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control”, wherein start parking assist control indicates autonomous or manual mode to parking assist control), the at least one processor configured to:
determine, in response to the vehicle entering a predetermined determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (FIG. 7A 710-715; para. [0090]: “Step 710, and determines whether or not the own vehicle V is traveling near the registered GPS position based on the GPS position calculated in Step 705 (in other words, whether or nota difference between the GPS position and the registered GPS position is equal to or less than a predetermined difference threshold value).”, wherein less than a predetermined difference threshold value indicates a predetermined determination area), a travel condition in the second travel mode (FIG. 7B; para. [0097]-[0099]: “Step 740 of FIG. 7B, and determines whether or not the start condition for the parking assist control is satisfied. The start condition is a condition which is satisfied when the parking assist control can be started at the current time. […] Therefore, when the own vehicle V is positioned on the registered path Rreg (“Yes” in Step 740), the CPU determines that there is a possibility that the start condition is satisfied, and advances the process to Step 745 […] The parking assist control can be started when the own vehicle V can travel along the registered path Rreg. Therefore, when it is possible for the own vehicle V to travel (“Yes” in Step 745), the CPU determines that the start condition is satisfied, and advances the process to Step 750.”),
perform a first notification prompting a user to perform an approval operation for transitioning to the second travel mode in response to determining that the travel condition is satisfied (FIG. 9; para. [0101]-[0103]: “In Step 750, the CPU notifies the driver that the start condition is satisfied by performing various types of display on the display 25a. […] FIG. 9, the start condition is satisfied, and the parking assist control can be started immediately (that is, at the current position). For this reason, the message “Assist can be started” (assist-available message) is displayed as the message M1. The message M2 is a message to alert the driver.”), and
transition to the second travel mode in response to the approval operation being received (FIG. 7B 760; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg. Thereafter, the CPU advances the process to Step 795, and ends the processing”).
Regarding claim 4, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether a route to the target position includes a region in which the vehicle is allowed to travel in the second travel mode (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0066]: “The parking assist mode is a mode in which “control of parking an own vehicle in a registered parking position by automatically moving the own vehicle along a registered path” and “control of parking the own vehicle in the registered parking position by assisting the own vehicle to move along the registered path” are executed as parking assist control.”, wherein registered path indicates a route to the target position includes a region in which the vehicle is allowed to travel in the second travel mode).
Regarding claim 5, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches further comprising:
a storage unit configured to store map information (FIG. 4-5; Claim 1: “register a group of position coordinates of the relative positions of the vehicle with respect to a predetermined reference point in a storage device as the registered path together with a position coordinate of the feature point and a position coordinate of the three-dimensional object with respect to the predetermined reference point”; para. [0085]: “CPU advances the process to Step 465, and stores (registers) the GPS position and the GPS azimuth at the registration start position in the ROM of the ECU 10 as the registered GPS position and the registered GPS azimuth. In addition, the CPU stores (registers) a group of the position coordinates of the own vehicle V (group of the position coordinates on a path R from the origin O to a point Pr via a point Pc) as a registered path Rreg in the ROM. Further, the CPU stores (registers) the feature point information and (the group of) the position coordinates of the three-dimensional objects in the ROM.”), wherein
the vehicle includes an external environment recognition unit configured to perform external environment recognition (para. [0050]: “Each camera sensor 11 acquires image data (image information) by photographing an area corresponding to a photographing region.”; para. [0092]: “the camera sensors 11. In addition, the CPU acquires the positions (relative positions with respect to the own vehicle V) of the three-dimensional objects”), and
the at least one processor is configured to cause the vehicle to travel in the second travel mode based on the map information stored in the storage unit and external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0092]-[0096]: “The CPU then advances the process to Step 720, and generates the specific overhead view images based on the overhead view image data generated through use of the image data transmitted from the camera sensors 1 […] calculates the registered path Rreg based on the position coordinates”; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg.”, para. [0119]: “three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered. Therefore, the parking assist control can be started even in the middle of the registered path, and hence the convenience of the parking assist control is further improved”, wherein the parking assist control is performed based on stored path data and reference points based on objects which are detected by the camera).
Regarding claim 6, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 5. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit in the determination area and the map information stored in the storage unit satisfy a predetermined matching condition (FIG. 7A; para. [0094]: “the CPU advances the process to Step 730, and determines whether or not a feature point F and/or a registered three-dimensional object have/has been detected. […] the position coordinates having a matching degree equal to or more than the matching degree threshold value, the CPU determines that a registered three-dimensional object has been detected”; Abstract: “storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information, calculates, when a feature point and a three-dimensional object are detected”, wherein features and GPS coordinates are saved in storage during the registration phase, and matching occurs in order to determine activation of parking assist control).
Regarding claim 7, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 5. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the storage unit stores map information based on the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit during past traveling of the vehicle (para. [0011]: “not only the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path (a group of the position coordinates of the relative positions of the vehicle with respect to the reference point) are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered”; Abstract: “registers in a storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information”, wherein features and GPS coordinates are saved in storage during the registration phase).
Regarding claim 8, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 7. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the storage unit stores a route during past traveling of the vehicle and the map information based on the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit during the past traveling in association with each other (Abstract: “registers in a storage device a path along which the vehicle has traveled when the driver has driven the vehicle from a start position to a parking position as a registered path together with a feature point extracted from a surrounding of the path and a three-dimensional object included in the three-dimensional object information, calculates, when a feature point and a three-dimensional object are detected, the registered path based on the positions of the feature point and the three-dimensional object”; para. [0119: “not only the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered”, wherein registered indicates stores a route during past traveling of the vehicle), and
the at least one processor is configured to cause the vehicle to travel in the second travel mode based on map information corresponding to a travel route of the vehicle among the map information stored in the storage unit and the external environment information obtained by the external environment recognition unit (FIG. 7A-7B; FIG. 8; para. [0092]-[0096]: “The CPU then advances the process to Step 720, and generates the specific overhead view images based on the overhead view image data generated through use of the image data transmitted from the camera sensors 1 […] calculates the registered path Rreg based on the position coordinates”; para. [0108]: “In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg.”, para. [0119]: “three-dimensional objects of the surrounding at the registration start position, but also the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects of the surrounding of the path are registered. More specifically, the positions of the feature points and the three-dimensional objects are converted into position coordinates with respect to the reference point and then registered. Therefore, the parking assist control can be started even in the middle of the registered path, and hence the convenience of the parking assist control is further improved”, wherein the parking assist control is performed based on stored path data and reference points based on objects which are detected by the camera).).
Regarding claim 9, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 5. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the map information is map information on a region including the determination area and a travelable area where traveling in the second travel mode is possible (FIG.9; FIG. 11; para. [0113]: “an assist-available area R2 is superimposed on the travel direction image I1.”; para. [0118]: “assist-available area R1 is displayed on the display 25 a when the start condition is satisfied. As a result, the driver can visually recognize the area in which the parking assist control can be started.”; para. [0069]: “and the azimuth of the own vehicle V at the registration start position based on the GPS signals transmitted from the GPS receiver 16.”), and the at least one processor transitions to the second travel mode when the approval operation is received and the vehicle enters the travelable area (FIG.9; FIG. 11; FIG. 12; para. [0107]-[0108]: “Then, the CPU advances the process to Step 755, and determines whether or not the start button B has been pressed. When the start button B has not been pressed (“No” in Step 755), the CPU determines that the driver does not wish to start the parking assist control, and returns the process to Step 705. Meanwhile, when the start button B has been pressed (“Yes” in Step 755), the CPU determines that the driver wishes to start the parking assist control, and advances the process to Step 760 […] In Step 760, the CPU starts the parking assist control along the registered path Rreg”).
Regarding claim 10, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches, wherein the travel condition includes at least one of conditions whether a state in which a travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area exceeds a first speed does not continue for a predetermined time or more, and whether a travel speed of the vehicle in the determination area does not exceed a second speed (para. [0088]: “when a start condition which is described later (a condition that is satisfied when it is determined that parking assist control can be started (i.e., startable)) is satisfied during a period in which the vehicle V is traveling at a vehicle speed equal to or lower than the vehicle speed threshold value, the CPU notifies (proposes to) the driver that the parking assist control can be started regardless of whether or not the driver expresses an intention to use the parking assist control”).
Regarding claim 11, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform control for parking the vehicle at the target position in the second travel mode (FIG. 8; FIG. 7B 760: “Start parking assist control”).
Regarding claim 14, it recites a method claim comprising claim limitations similar to those performed by the vehicle control device according to claim 1, and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 15, MAEJIMA further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a control program for a vehicle control device, the vehicle control device including at least one processor configured to perform travel control for moving a vehicle to a target position and to transition between a first travel mode and a second travel mode and, the control program causing the at least one processor to execute processing (FIG. 7A-7B; para. [0047]: “The CPU implements various functions by executing instructions (programs and routines) stored in the ROM. A part of those functions may be executed by another ECU (not shown).”, wherein ROM corresponds to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium) comprising claim limitations similar to those performed by the vehicle control device according to claim 1, and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAEJIMA, in view of WALTER (DE 102022126726 A1).
A PE2E English Translation of WALTER cited by the Examiner is attached.
Regarding claim 2, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, the at least one processor performs deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition and performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control (para. [0159]: “The present invention can also be applied to a vehicle traveling by autonomous driving (by autonomous driving control)”; para. [0088]: “The parking assist mode becomes available for use when the path R is registered in the registration mode. The parking assist mode is constantly maintained in the active state during a period in which the own vehicle V is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed threshold value (for example, 30 km/h).”), but fails to specifically teach performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control.
However, in the same field of endeavor, WALTER teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (pg 3 5th paragraph: “The one or more parking intention indicators may be or include, for example: […] the vehicle is on a residential street and/or a street with parking facilities. […] - The motor vehicle is located near his home address. - There is good parking on the current road. - The motor vehicle is located near a navigation destination of the vehicle's navigation system. - In the past, parking was often done near the current location”), performs a second notification to the user regarding the deceleration control (pg 3 last paragraph: “The driver is preferably also informed about the reduction of driving speed to the parking space search speed and/or the parking space search described below, for example by displaying a corresponding text (e.g. "Speed is reduced to search for a parking space") or a suitable symbol”).
MAEJIMA and WALTER are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of WALTER and inform the driver of a speed reduction in response to detection of parking intent or triggering condition. Doing so would enhance user experience by informing an user of a reason of speed reduction (WALTER pg 3 last paragraph), which is necessary in order to activate parking assist mode.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAEJIMA, in view of TSUJINO (US20200398826A1).
Regarding claim 3, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (para. [0090]: “determines whether or not the own vehicle V is traveling near the registered GPS position based on the GPS position calculated in Step 705 (in other words, whether or nota difference between the GPS position and the registered GPS position is equal to or less than a predetermined difference threshold value)”), deceleration of the vehicle for determining the travel condition (para. [0088]-[0089]: “The parking assist mode is constantly maintained in the active state during a period in which the own vehicle V is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed threshold value (for example, 30 km/h) […] Therefore, when the vehicle speed drops to the vehicle speed threshold value or lower in a case in which the path R is registered, the parking assist mode is started in Step 700 of FIG. 7A”), but fails to specifically teach wherein, in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode, the processor performs a third notification prompting the user to perform deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition.
However, in the same field of endeavor, TSUJINO teaches in response to the vehicle entering the determination area while the vehicle is traveling in the first travel mode (para. [0066]: “the analysis of the detection result of the external environment sensor 7 (more specifically, by the analysis of the images captured by the external cameras 19 based on a known image analysis method such as pattern matching), the external environment recognizing unit 41 can acquire, for example, a lane on a road delimited by road signs and a parking space delimited by white lines and the like provided on a surface of a road, a parking lot,”), the processor performs a third notification prompting the user to perform deceleration control of the vehicle for determining the travel condition (para. [0025]: “when the vehicle is traveling at the first predetermined value or higher, […] the occupant is prompted to reduce the vehicle speed so that the parking position candidates can be detected at a low vehicle speed where the detection accuracy is high”; para. [0132]: “At this time, the action plan unit 43 may preferably display a notification on the touch panel 32 such as […] “Slow down.”).
MAEJIMA and TSUJINO are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of TSUJINO and inform the driver to reduce speed in response to detection of parking area. Doing so would enhance user experience by informing a user to reduce speed in order to activate parking assist mode.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAEJIMA, in view of HIRATA (US 20200140011 A1).
Regarding claim 12, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1, but fails to specifically teach wherein the travel condition includes whether a state of a device of the vehicle used in the second travel mode is normal.
However, in the same field of endeavor, HIRATA teaches wherein the travel condition includes whether a state of a device of the vehicle used in the second travel mode is normal (para. [0097]: “The parking assistance unit 44 constantly performs a determination process of determining whether the parking assistance start condition is satisfied during the parking available area search mode (S1300). The parking assistance start condition is a condition for determining whether guidance by automatic steering may be started. For example, it may be a condition for determining whether the vehicle speed is sufficiently reduced (for example, whether the vehicle speed is 1 to 2 km/h or less), whether there are any abnormalities in various sensors and various actuators, or the like. In the support start condition determination process, when parking assistance start conditions are not met, for example, when the vehicle speed is not sufficiently reduced, or a sensor is abnormal, the parking assistance unit 44 invalidates the input of the operation unit 14g that accepts an operation for requesting the parking assistance, and puts the parking assistance on hold”).
MAEJIMA and HIRATA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of HIRATA and further include checking whether a sensor is abnormal as a starting condition. Doing so would enhance safety by ensuring devices needed to perform parking assist control is normal, and thus prevent accidents which may occur due to abnormal device.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAEJIMA, in view of Tzempetzis (US 20200254998 A1).
Regarding claim 13, MAEJIMA teaches the vehicle control device according to claim 1. MAEJIMA further teaches wherein the first travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway (para. [0159]: “The present invention can also be applied to a vehicle traveling by autonomous driving (by autonomous driving control).”, wherein autonomous driving indicates manual driving and thus indicates traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway in order to reach the destination/parking area), and the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a (FIG. 8 para. [0002]: “the registered parking position being a parking position (parking space) of the vehicle registered in advance”), but fails to specifically teach the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a private land.
However, Tzempetzis teaches wherein the first travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a general road and a highway the second travel mode is applied to traveling of the vehicle on a private land (para. [0041]: “the computing unit of the parking assistance device 2 and therefore the parking system 2 itself will not permit or carry out the driverless parking starting from the initial position 5 but rather, for example, in the present case inform the driver that the corresponding function cannot yet be activated and that he must still retain control over the motor vehicle 1, for example in a partially assisted driving mode, until the private section 14 is reached.; para. [0031]: “to enable and/or carry out driverless parking of the motor vehicle along the parking trajectory exclusively in a section of the checked parking trajectory which runs over private land”; para. [0029]: “public land comprises a public roadway and in particular the private land comprises a private roadway”, wherein manual mode must be maintained in public land, while parking assist may only be activated in private lands).
MAEJIMA and Tzempetzis are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of activating parking assist mode in response to a triggering condition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MAEJIMA to incorporate the teachings of Tzempetzis and further include performing parking assist in a private land. Doing so would enhance safety by preventing parking assist from entering to public road traffic area, and thus preventing irritating other participants in public road traffic and correspondingly causing congestion or even an accident (Tzempetzis, para. [0012]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Grimm (US 20130085637 A1) teaches assisting a driver of a motor vehicle when parking in a parking space, in particular in a garage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7356. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM - 5PM.
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, James J Lee can be reached on (571) 270-5965. 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.
/ANDREW SANG KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights