DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits and is responsive to the documents filed 07/01/2025.
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 .
Priority
This application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/535,304,
filed 12/11/2023, which claims the benefit U.S. Patent Application No. 16/989,485, filed 08/10/2020, issued on 01/30/2024 as U.S. Patent No. 11,885,639. See MPEP §201.07[R-08.2017]. In accordance with MPEP §609.02 [R-07.2015] Section A. 2 and MPEP §2001.06(b)[R-08.2017] (last paragraph), the Examiner has reviewed and considered the prior art cited in the Parent Application. Also in accordance with MPEP §2001.06(b) [R-08.2017] (last paragraph), all documents cited or considered ‘of record’ in the Parent Application are now considered cited or ‘of record’ in this application. Additionally, Applicant(s) are reminded that a listing of the information cited or ‘of record’ in the Parent Application need not be resubmitted in this application unless Applicants desire the information to be printed on a patent issuing from this application. See MPEP §609.02 [R-07.2015] Section A. 2. Finally, Applicants are reminded that the prosecution history of the Parent Application is relevant in this application. See e.g., Microsoft Corp. v. Multi-Tech Sys., Inc., 357 F.3d 1340, 1350, 69 USPQ2d 1815, 1823 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (holding that statements made in prosecution of one patent are relevant to the scope of all sibling patents).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS)(s) submitted on 07/01/2025 has/have been received, considered, and is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS(s) has/have been considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The disclosure fails to include the issuance of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/535,304 on 08/05/2025 as U.S. Patent No. 12,379,226.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "by the one or more processors" in “generating, by the one or more processors of one or more server computing devices”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites in part, “generating by the one or more processors”. Examiner notes removing the term “the” so the corrected claim would then read in part, “generating by one or more processors”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-7 and 10-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,379,226. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claim a method for generating, by one or more processors, a scouting objective for a feature identified by a vehicle based on an identified area associated with the feature and providing by the one or more processors to at least one other vehicle of the fleet of vehicles, the scouting objective in order to enable the at least one other vehicle to scout the area for the feature according to the scouting objective, as shown by their side by side comparison of for example only, claim(s) 1 and 13 below.
Application 19/256,718
Application 18/535,304
1. A method comprising:
1. (original) A method comprising:
identifying, by one or more processors of one or more server computing devices, an area including a feature identified by a vehicle of a fleet of vehicles;
generating, by the one or more processors of one or more server computing devices, a scouting objective for a feature identified by a vehicle of a fleet of vehicles based on an area associated with the feature; and
generating, by the one or more processors, a scouting objective for the feature based on the identified area; and
providing, by the one or more processors to at least one other vehicle of the fleet of vehicles, the scouting objective in order to enable the at least one other vehicle to scout the area for the feature according to the scouting objective.
providing, by the one or more processors to at least one other vehicle of the fleet of vehicles, the scouting objective in order to enable the at least one other vehicle to scout the identified area for the feature according to the scouting objective.
13. A system comprising: one or more server computing devices including one or more processors configured to:generate a scouting objective for a feature identified by a vehicle of a fleet of vehicles based on an area associated with the feature; and provide, to at least one other vehicle of the fleet of vehicles, the scouting objective in order to enable the at least one other vehicle to scout the area for the feature according to the scouting objective.
1. (original) A method comprising: identifying, by one or more processors of one or more server computing devices, an area including a feature identified by a vehicle of a fleet of vehicles; generating, by the one or more processors, a scouting objective for the feature based on the identified area; and providing, by the one or more processors to at least one other vehicle of the fleet of vehicles, the scouting objective in order to enable the at least one other vehicle to scout the identified area for the feature according to the scouting objective.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure as teaching the state of the art of generating scouting objectives, at the time of filing. For example:
US 11391587 B1 to Joshi; Ajay teaches, inter alia Assessing The Impact Of Blockages On Autonomous Vehicle Services in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“The disclosure relates to assessing impact of blockages on an autonomous vehicle transportation service. An example method may include identifying a plurality of starting and destination location pairs within a service area; running a first plurality of simulations by determining a first route for each of the plurality of pairs without including a first blockage in the service area; determining a first summary for each determined first route identifying a length of time to complete that determined route; running a second plurality of simulations by determining a second route for each of the plurality of pairs and including the first blockage in the service area; determining a second summary for each determined second route identifying a length of time to complete that determined route; and comparing the determined first summaries with the determined second summaries in order to assess an impact of the first blockage on the service.”
PNG
media_image1.png
402
686
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
370
674
media_image2.png
Greyscale
US 11017674 B1 to Patterson; Katharine teaches, inter alia Managing And Tracking Scouting Tasks Using Autonomous Vehicles in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“A method is provided for managing and tracking scouting tasks to obtain map information using a fleet of autonomous vehicles. For instance, the method includes defining a scouting quest to obtain the map information. The scouting quest includes a plurality of objectives. Each objective is associated with a geographic location from which sensor data is to be captured. The method also includes receiving a first update message from an autonomous vehicle of the fleet. The update message identifies a location of the autonomous vehicle. The method also includes assigning at least one of the objectives to the autonomous vehicle based on the location of the autonomous vehicle. The method also includes, sending instructions to the autonomous vehicle in order to cause the autonomous vehicle to complete the at least one objective and after sending, tracking a status of the scouting quest.”
PNG
media_image3.png
712
484
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
372
676
media_image4.png
Greyscale
US 20200249032 A1 to Lee; Seongsoo teaches, inter alia APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR UPDATING HIGH DEFINITION MAP FOR AUTONOMOUS DRIVING in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“A method for updating a high. definition map according to one embodiment comprises: obtaining a two-dimensional image that captures a target area corresponding to at least a part of an area expressed by a three-dimensional high definition map, generating a three-dimensional local landmark map of the target area from a position of a landmark in the two-dimensional image, based on a position and an orientation of a photographing device which has captured the two-dimensional image and updating the high definition map with reference to the local landmark map corresponding to the target area of the three-dimensional high definition map.”
PNG
media_image5.png
572
420
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
720
422
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT L PINKERTON whose telephone number is (571)272-9820. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 9:00-4:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on 571-272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/ROBERT L PINKERTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/DANIEL L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights