DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
Claim 2 recites a conditional limitation ("if the road information ahead indicates an intersection"). Per MPEP 2111.04(II) and Ex parte Schulhauser, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim containing a conditional step encompasses the instance in which the condition is not met; the conditional step therefore need not be performed and is not given patentable weight. Claim 2 is nonetheless addressed on the merits below.
Claim 3 depends from claim 2 and further limits the turn-angle determination recited in claim 2's conditional clause. For the reasons stated as to claim 2, that determination is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
Claim 4, however, recites no condition and modifies the unconditional determining step of claim 1; it is therefore given full patentable weight and is addressed on the merits below.
Claim 5 is conditioned on the recited turn angle and turn start distance satisfying stated thresholds. As with claims 2 and 3, and for the reasons stated with respect to those claims, the broadest reasonable interpretation encompasses the instance in which the condition is not met, and the conditional step is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
Claim 6 is conditioned on the recited turn angle and turn start distance satisfying stated thresholds and, for the reasons stated as to claim 5, is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
Claim 7 is conditioned on the road information ahead indicating a roundabout and, for the reasons stated as to claim 2, is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
Claim 8 recites no condition and is given full patentable weight.
Claim 9 is conditioned on a determination that the ego vehicle will drive towards an exit lane of the roundabout and, for the reasons stated as to claim 2, is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
Claim 10 is conditioned on the road information ahead indicating a highway entrance lane or a highway exit lane and, for the reasons stated as to claim 2, is not given patentable weight. MPEP 2111.04(II); Ex parte Schulhauser.
The conditional limitations recited in claims 12–18 are given full patentable weight. Unlike a method claim, an apparatus claim is anticipated or rendered obvious where the prior art structure is capable of performing the recited function; the conditional nature of the recited functions therefore does not remove them from consideration.
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 11–19 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 11 recites "the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information." There is insufficient antecedent basis for "the navigation information" in the claim. Claims 12–19 are rejected for the same reason by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 18 recites "the highway entrance lane or the exit lane." It is unclear whether "the exit lane" refers to the highway exit lane recited in claim 18 or to the exit lane of the roundabout recited in claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1–7, 10, 11, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Raubvogel (US 9,079,499 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Raubvogel discloses a method for operating a turn signal based on road information ahead (Abstract; Figs. 2, 3), comprising:
determining road information ahead based on navigation information (Raubvogel discloses navigation system 202 determines the current location of vehicle 201 via GPS receiver 203 and obtains road information from data store 206 (col. 3, ll. 55–63; col. 4, ll. 13–22), and determines therefrom that the vehicle is approaching an intersection or entrance/exit ramp along the determined route (col. 5, ll. 47–57; col. 6, ll. 61–63; see also claim 13, col. 16, ll. 1–8).);
determining whether operation of a turn signal is required based on the road information ahead and a driving path of an ego vehicle according to the navigation information (Raubvogel discloses activation is determined when vehicle 201 is within a specified distance of the intersection/entrance/exit ramp and the route determined at step 302 indicates a right turn or right exit (right signal) or a left turn or left exit (left signal) (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5; Fig. 3, steps 303–304).); and
operating the turn signal of the ego vehicle based on whether the operation of the turn signal is required (Raubvogel discloses turn signal control system 211 automatically activates the specified turn signal 212 responsive to the signal from navigation system 202, and deactivates it once the vehicle is past the maneuver location (col. 7, ll. 6–11 and ll. 15–27; Fig. 3, steps 305–306).).
Regarding claim 2, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 1, wherein if the road information ahead indicates an intersection in the determining of the road information, the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required further comprises: determining a size of a turn angle of the ego vehicle according to a predicted driving path at the intersection based on the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information (The recited turn-angle determination is conditioned on the road information ahead indicating an intersection, and the broadest reasonable interpretation encompasses the instance in which it does not; claim 2 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 1.).
Regarding claim 3, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the size of the turn angle of the ego vehicle is obtained by summing angles of tangent lines at respective positions of a curve comprising a plurality of points along a navigation route (The recited computation further limits a step that is conditional and need not be performed; claim 3 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 1.).
Regarding claim 4, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required further comprises: determining a turn start distance from a current position of the ego vehicle to a position where the ego vehicle starts turning (Raubvogel discloses the system automatically activates the appropriate turn signal 212 at a specified distance before a maneuver location as specified by the route instructions (col. 6, ll. 5–7), and activation is triggered when vehicle 201 is within a specified distance of the intersection, entrance/exit ramp, or other location where the route instruction is to be followed (col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5). The distance before the intersection at which activation occurs is a settable parameter (col. 2, ll. 8–11). As illustrated in FIGS. 8A–8C, the turn signal is activated at a certain distance from the location where the specified maneuver — in that example a right turn — is to be performed, with the distance from vehicle 201's current position to intersection 801 successively determined as 100 yards, 60 yards, and 30 yards (col. 9, ll. 40–44, 52–53, and 62–66). The location at which the specified turn is to be performed is the position at which the ego vehicle starts turning.).
Regarding claim 5, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 4, further comprising: determining that operation of a left turn signal is required by determining that the ego vehicle will make a left turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds a predetermined angle in a counter-clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than a predetermined distance (The step added by claim 5 is performed only upon satisfaction of a condition that the broadest reasonable interpretation permits to be unmet; claim 5 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 4.).
Regarding claim 6, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: determining that operation of a right turn signal is required by determining that the ego vehicle will make a right turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds the predetermined angle in a clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than the predetermined distance (The step added by claim 6 is performed only upon satisfaction of a condition that the broadest reasonable interpretation permits to be unmet; claim 6 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 4.).
Regarding claim 7, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 1, wherein if the road information ahead indicates a roundabout in the determining of the road information, the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required comprises: determining that operation of a left turn signal is required at a predetermined distance before entering the roundabout (The recited determination is conditioned on the road information ahead indicating a roundabout, and the broadest reasonable interpretation encompasses the instance in which it does not; claim 7 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 1.).
Regarding claim 10, Raubvogel discloses the method of claim 1, wherein if the road information ahead indicates a highway entrance lane or a highway exit lane in the determining of the road information, it is determined that operation of the turn signal is required in a direction of the highway entrance lane or the highway exit lane, based on the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information (Raubvogel discloses navigation system 202 transmits a signal to cause turn signal control system 211 to automatically activate turn signals 212 when vehicle 201 is approaching an entrance/exit ramp or other location where the determined route indicates that a maneuver such as an entrance or exit should be performed (col. 5, ll. 47–57), and where the specified maneuver is a right exit the right turn signal is activated while a left exit causes the left turn signal to be activated (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5). Raubvogel confirms in claim 13 that the location specified for the maneuver comprises an interchange, an entrance ramp, or an exit ramp, and that the maneuver comprises an exit or an entrance (col. 16, ll. 1–8). The route is determined at step 302 from the current position and the road information stored in data store 206 (col. 6, ll. 33–39).).
Regarding claim 11, Raubvogel discloses a system comprising functions corresponding to the method steps of claim 1, performed by a navigation device (navigation system 202, col. 3, ll. 55–63), a controller (processor 205, col. 4, ll. 9–22), and a turn signal apparatus (turn signal control system 211 and turn signals 212, col. 5, ll. 5–20). The scope and content of the recited limitations are otherwise substantially the same as claim 1, and the teachings of Raubvogel that anticipate claim 1 likewise apply to claim 11.
Regarding claim 20, Raubvogel discloses the method steps of claim 1 in the form of a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium recording a program for executing those steps. Raubvogel discloses that the invention can be implemented as a computer program product comprising a nontransitory computer-readable storage medium and computer program code, encoded on the medium, for causing a processor in a computing device to perform the described techniques (col. 10, ll. 34–43, col. 11, ll. 22–40; see also claim 7). The scope and content of the recited steps are otherwise identical to claim 1, and the teachings of Raubvogel that anticipate claim 1 likewise apply to claim 20.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujita et al. (US 2021/0269024 A1). The rejection of claims 1, 7, 11, and 20 on this ground is presented in the alternative to the rejection of those claims over Raubvogel set forth above. Claims 8, 9, 15, and 16 are rejected on this ground only.
Regarding claim 1, Fujita discloses a method for operating a turn signal based on road information ahead (Fujita discloses a driving assist method in which a controller computes a travel route and executes driving assist control, including autonomous control of the direction indicator lights ([0006], [0021]), comprising:
determining road information ahead based on navigation information (Fujita discloses map data storage part 2 contains electronic map data in which road information is defined by nodes and links and includes intersection positions, directions to enter intersections, and intersection classifications ([0034]); roundabout arrival assessment part 32 receives host vehicle position information, map data information, and target route information and assesses whether the host vehicle has arrived at a roundabout ([0047]; step S3, [0069]), the assessment being made when the host vehicle comes within a prescribed distance D, for example 50 m, of the roundabout ([0070]).);
determining whether operation of a turn signal is required based on the road information ahead and a driving path of an ego vehicle according to the navigation information (Fujita discloses positional relationship assessment part 36 assesses the relationship between the host vehicle entrance and the host vehicle exit based on the target route ([0058]), and the controller determines whether the left turn signal illumination condition is fulfilled (step S6, [0085]), whether the right turn signal illumination condition is fulfilled (step S7, [0086]), or whether neither turn signal is to be illuminated (step S41, [0109]), the target route being generated from the road information in map data storage part 2 ([0035]).); and
operating the turn signal of the ego vehicle based on whether the operation of the turn signal is required (Fujita discloses the determined turn signal information is output to autonomous driving control part 4 ([0035]) and thence to turn signal actuator 54 ([0036]), which controls illumination of turn signals 6 ([0041]–[0042]).).
Regarding claim 7, Fujita discloses the method of claim 1, wherein if the road information ahead indicates a roundabout in the determining of the road information, the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required comprises: determining that operation of a left turn signal is required at a predetermined distance before entering the roundabout (Fujita discloses first illumination area setting part 33a sets a first illumination area in which a turn signal is to be illuminated to indicate that the host vehicle is to enter the roundabout, that area being "an area before the host vehicle enters the roundabout" ([0054]), and first illumination area A1 is set between the roundabout RA and a first illumination position 101 located, for example, 30 m from the roundabout ([0072]). Upon the host vehicle arriving at A1 and the left turn signal illumination condition being fulfilled, control determining to illuminate the left turn signal is performed (step S11, [0091]). For the first target route TR1, the left turn signal is illuminated at time t12 upon arrival at A1, and only at the later time t13 does the host vehicle arrive at the host vehicle entrance and enter the circular roadway ([0119]–[0120]).).
Regarding claim 8, Fujita discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising: after the ego vehicle enters the roundabout, controlling the left turn signal to an OFF state (Fujita discloses that turn signal control part 38 extinguishes the left turn signal after the host vehicle has entered the roundabout ([0063]), control determining to extinguish the left turn signal being performed upon assessment that the host vehicle has entered the circular roadway (step S21, [0099]). Fujita states the rule generally: the left turn signal "is preferably extinguished after the host vehicle has entered the circular roadway" ([0194]).).
Regarding claim 9, Fujita discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: while the ego vehicle is driving in the roundabout, determining that operation of a right turn signal is required if it is determined that the ego vehicle will drive towards an exit lane of the roundabout, based on the road information ahead and the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information (The step added by claim 9 is performed only upon satisfaction of a condition that the broadest reasonable interpretation permits to be unmet; claim 9 therefore requires nothing beyond claim 8.).
Regarding claim 11, Fujita discloses the recited navigation device, controller, and turn signal apparatus, corresponding respectively to GPS 13 and map data storage part 2 ([0029], [0033]–[0034]), recognition assessment processor 3 ([0035]), and turn signal actuator 54 with turn signals 6 ([0041]–[0042]). The teachings of Fujita that anticipate claim 1 likewise apply to claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, Fujita discloses the system of claim 11, wherein if the road information ahead indicates a roundabout, the controller is configured to control the turn signal apparatus to operate a left turn signal by determining that operation of the left turn signal is required at a predetermined distance before entering the roundabout (Fujita discloses first illumination area setting part 33a sets a first illumination area in which a turn signal is to be illuminated to indicate that the host vehicle is to enter the roundabout, that area being "an area before the host vehicle enters the roundabout" ([0054]) and set between the roundabout and a first illumination position located, for example, 30 m from it ([0072]). Upon the host vehicle arriving at that area and the left turn signal illumination condition being fulfilled, turn signal control part 38 performs control determining to illuminate the left turn signal (step S11, [0091]), the left turn signal thereby being illuminated ([0119]) before the host vehicle arrives at the host vehicle entrance and enters the circular roadway ([0120]).).
Regarding claim 16, Fujita discloses the system of claim 15, wherein the controller is configured to control the turn signal apparatus such that the left turn signal is in an OFF state after the ego vehicle enters the roundabout (Fujita discloses turn signal control part 38 extinguishes the left turn signal after the host vehicle has entered the roundabout ([0063]), control determining to extinguish the left turn signal being performed upon assessment that the host vehicle has entered the circular roadway (step S21, [0099]). Fujita states the rule generally: the left turn signal "is preferably extinguished after the host vehicle has entered the circular roadway" ([0194]).).
Regarding claim 20, Fujita discloses the method steps of claim 1 performed by recognition assessment processor 3 ([0035]). The teachings of Fujita that anticipate claim 1 likewise apply to claim 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2, 12, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raubvogel (US 9,079,499 B1) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2005/0159884 A1). The rejection of claim 2 on this ground is presented in the alternative to the rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 102 set forth above. Claims 12–14 are rejected on this ground only.
Regarding claim 2, Raubvogel teaches the method of claim 1, wherein if the road information ahead indicates an intersection in the determining of the road information (Raubvogel discloses determining that an intersection lies ahead along the determined route (col. 5, ll. 47–57; col. 6, ll. 61–63; claim 13, col. 16, ll. 1–8), generating a route instruction specifying the maneuver to be performed at that location (col. 6, ll. 40–48; Fig. 3, step 303), and determining whether operation of the turn signal is required according to whether that maneuver is a right turn or a left turn (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 7, ll. 1–5).), but does not expressly disclose the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required further comprises: determining a size of a turn angle of the ego vehicle according to a predicted driving path at the intersection based on the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information.
Suzuki teaches a right/left turn direction determination performed as the vehicle approaches an intersection in the guide route, in order to generate the corresponding maneuver guidance ("Turn right," "Turn left"), with no maneuver output made where the guide route continues along the road ([0047]–[0048]). In that determination, the control circuit specifies an angle θ between an approach link and an exit link at a subject node, the subject node being the node corresponding to the intersection through which the vehicle is to pass next, the approach link being the link immediately prior to that node in the guide route, and the exit link being the link immediately subsequent in the guide route ([0049]; Fig. 6, Step 205). The angle is zero where the approach and exit directions are the same, +90° for an orthogonal right turn, and −90° for an orthogonal left turn ([0049]), and is read from the angle of the exit link to the approach link stored in the node-link connection information of the map data ([0035], [0037], [0050]). The magnitude of θ is then evaluated against directional-area threshold angles αi to resolve the maneuver as straight forward, rightward, leftward, diagonal, and so forth ([0051]–[0055], [0069]; Fig. 7), which also serves as an along-a-road determination distinguishing a genuine turn from travel continuing along the road ([0067]). Suzuki further confirms that specifying the angle θ of the exit road to the approach road from map information, and assigning it to a directional area, was the conventional manner of performing this determination ([0003]–[0007]; Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the size of the turn angle at the upcoming intersection as taught by Suzuki when performing Raubvogel's determination of whether and which turn signal is required. Raubvogel's step 303 outputs a route instruction specifying the maneuver at the upcoming intersection, and its step 304 conditions turn signal activation on whether that maneuver is a right turn or a left turn, but Raubvogel is silent as to the underlying derivation; Suzuki supplies a known technique for generating precisely that right/left maneuver determination, operating on the same link-and-node map data and the same computed route already present in Raubvogel. The combination amounts to the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, and to the combination of prior art elements according to known methods, yielding the predictable result of correctly identifying the direction of the upcoming maneuver so that the corresponding turn signal is activated. MPEP 2143(I)(A), (C). One of ordinary skill would have been further motivated by Suzuki's teaching that the angle-based determination distinguishes a turn from a route that merely continues along the road ([0047], [0067]), thereby avoiding turn signal activation where no turn is to be made. Both references are in the same field of endeavor — vehicle navigation systems that determine, from map data and a computed route, the maneuver to be performed at an upcoming intersection — and Suzuki is reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by Raubvogel. MPEP 2141.01(a).
Regarding claim 12, Raubvogel teaches the system of claim 11, wherein if the road information ahead indicates an intersection, the controller is configured to: determine a turn start distance from a current position of the ego vehicle to a position where the ego vehicle starts turning (Raubvogel discloses determining that an intersection lies ahead along the determined route (col. 5, ll. 47–57; claim 13, col. 16, ll. 1–8) and determining a turn start distance from the current position of the vehicle to the location where the specified maneuver is to be performed (col. 6, ll. 5–7; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5).), but does not expressly disclose determine a size of a turn angle of the ego vehicle according to a predicted driving path at the intersection based on the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information.
Suzuki teaches specifying the angle θ between the approach link and the exit link at the node corresponding to the intersection the vehicle is next to pass through, the approach and exit links being the links immediately prior to and subsequent to that node in the guide route, the angle being read from the node-link connection information in the map data and evaluated against threshold angles to resolve the maneuver ([0049]–[0051], [0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure Raubvogel's controller to determine the turn angle as taught by Suzuki. Raubvogel necessarily requires some mechanism for classifying the upcoming maneuver as a right or left turn, and Suzuki supplies a known mechanism operating on the same link-and-node map data and computed route already present in Raubvogel. The combination is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, with the predictable result of correctly identifying the direction of the upcoming maneuver. MPEP 2143(I)(C), (D). One of ordinary skill would have been further motivated by Suzuki's teaching that the angle determination distinguishes a genuine turn from a route continuing along the road ([0047], [0067]).
Regarding claim 13, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the controller is configured to control the turn signal apparatus to operate a left turn signal by determining that the ego vehicle will make a left turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds a predetermined angle in a counter-clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than a predetermined distance (Suzuki determines the maneuver direction by testing whether the turn angle θ of the guide route at the upcoming intersection falls within a directional area bounded by threshold angles αi, the leftward area lying between α9 and α10, and outputs "Turn left" accordingly ([0051], [0054]–[0055], [0069]). Raubvogel activates the left turn signal where the determined route indicates a left turn or left exit, and does so when the vehicle is within a specified distance of the intersection (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the controller of the Raubvogel/Suzuki system to determine that left turn signal operation is required upon the turn angle exceeding a threshold in the counter-clockwise direction and the turn start distance being less than a threshold distance. The angle comparison determines which maneuver the route calls for and therefore which signal is required; the distance comparison determines when the signal is activated in advance of that maneuver. Combining them conjunctively yields no more than the predictable result of each performing its established function. MPEP 2143(I)(A).).
Regarding claim 14, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the controller is configured to control the turn signal apparatus to operate a right turn signal by determining that the ego vehicle will make a right turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds the predetermined angle in a clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than the predetermined distance (Suzuki's threshold angles αi are measured as clockwise rotation angles from the straight-forward direction of the approach link and divide the full 360° about the intersection into symmetric directional areas at uniform 30° increments, the rightward area lying between α3 and α4 and the leftward area between α9 and α10 ([0051]); the maneuver — "Turn right" or "Turn left" — is output according to the directional area in which the turn angle θ falls ([0054]–[0055], [0069]). Raubvogel activates the right turn signal where the determined route indicates a right turn or right exit (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 7, ll. 1–5), and activates the appropriate signal at a specified distance before the maneuver location without regard to the direction of the maneuver (col. 6, ll. 5–7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the controller to determine that right turn signal operation is required upon the turn angle exceeding the same threshold angle in the clockwise direction and the turn start distance being less than the same threshold distance. Suzuki already resolves turn direction using angle criteria symmetric about the straight-ahead direction, so applying a threshold of equal magnitude in the opposite sense is nothing more than the use of that reference's own classification scheme for the maneuver it was designed to distinguish, and Raubvogel applies a single activation distance irrespective of maneuver direction. The result is entirely predictable. MPEP 2143(I)(A).).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 5, 6 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raubvogel (US 9,079,499 B1) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2005/0159884 A1) and further in view of Davidson (US 9,805,521 B1).
Regarding claim 3, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki teaches the method of claim 2, but does not expressly disclose wherein the size of the turn angle of the ego vehicle is obtained by summing angles of tangent lines at respective positions of a curve comprising a plurality of points along a navigation route. Suzuki discloses determining the size of a turn angle at the upcoming intersection from the approach link and exit link of the guide route (Suzuki [0049]–[0050], [0069]). Suzuki obtains that angle from a single stored link-to-link value and does not expressly disclose obtaining it by summing angles of tangent lines at respective positions of a curve comprising a plurality of points.
Davidson teaches determining the total angular change of a vehicle path through a roadway intersection from a plurality of points along that path. Davidson assesses data points to identify instances in which the vehicle's heading deviates by a threshold heading value between consecutive data points, comparing the locations of successive data points to assess changes in heading (col. 19, ll. 45–56). Referring to Davidson FIG. 7, a vehicle traversing the intersection of roads R1 and R2 traces a curved path represented by a plurality of data points 301–307; the heading at each point is known, and successive deviations θ1, θ2, and θ3 accumulate as the path curves through the turn until the heading stabilizes at point 307 (col. 19, l. 57 – col. 20, l. 12). For each data point, the module determines the change in heading by calculating the angle between the vehicle's current heading and its previous heading (col. 20, ll. 6–12). Where the change between adjacent points does not meet the threshold, Davidson teaches summing those changes across a plurality of data points and using the resulting aggregate heading change as the measure of the turn (col. 20, ll. 18–36). Davidson further classifies the maneuver from the magnitude and sign of that heading change — +45° to +135° being a right turn, −45° to −135° a left turn, and beyond ±135° a turn-around (col. 23, ll. 45–55) — and associates the point-wise path with underlying map data in which roads are defined by road segments extending between node points, identifying the nearest node point to each data point of the turn (col. 24, ll. 17–33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to obtain the turn angle of the Raubvogel/Suzuki combination by summing the tangent-direction angles at a plurality of points along the route path through the intersection, as taught by Davidson. Suzuki and Davidson quantify the same physical quantity for the same purpose — the total direction change of a vehicle path through an intersection, used to classify the maneuver as a right turn, a left turn, or neither — and differ only in the manner of computing it. Substituting Davidson's multi-point accumulation for Suzuki's single stored link angle is the simple substitution of one known technique for another to obtain the predictable result of a turn-angle magnitude. MPEP 2143(I)(B), (D). One of ordinary skill would have been motivated by Davidson's express teaching that summing across multiple points captures turns whose per-point heading change is individually below the detection threshold, and that adjusting the heading criterion in this manner eliminates false turn identifications (col. 20, ll. 13–36) — a benefit directly applicable to a turn path that curves gradually through an intersection rather than changing direction at a single point. Davidson is analogous art: it is directed to identifying and characterizing vehicle turns at roadway intersections using position and heading data referenced to road-network map data (col. 24, ll. 3–33), and is reasonably pertinent to the problem of determining the magnitude and direction of a turn at an upcoming intersection. MPEP 2141.01(a).
Regarding claim 4, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki and Davidson teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the determining of whether the operation of the turn signal is required further comprises: determining a turn start distance from a current position of the ego vehicle to a position where the ego vehicle starts turning (Raubvogel teaches the turn start distance of claim 4 as set forth above. Davidson additionally teaches identifying the point at which the vehicle begins to change its heading to make the turn — the beginning turn point — by assessing heading changes at data points preceding the turn (col. 21, ll. 6–11 and ll. 30–33), and determining distances between positions along the path from the associated location data (col. 21, ll. 34–40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to reference Raubvogel's activation distance to the point at which the route path begins to depart from the straight approach direction, as identified in the combination, rather than to the intersection location generally, in order to time activation of the turn signal relative to the actual commencement of the turn. This is the use of a known technique to improve a similar method in the same way, with the predictable result of a more accurately timed activation. MPEP 2143(I)(C), (D).).
Regarding claim 5, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki and Davidson teaches the method of claim 4, further comprising: determining that operation of a left turn signal is required by determining that the ego vehicle will make a left turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds a predetermined angle in a counter-clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than a predetermined distance (Suzuki determines the maneuver direction by testing whether the turn angle θ of the guide route at the upcoming intersection falls within a directional area bounded by threshold angles αi, the leftward area lying between α9 and α10, and outputs "Turn left" accordingly ([0049], [0051], [0054]–[0055], [0067], [0069]). Davidson likewise classifies a turn as left-hand where the accumulated heading change falls between −45° and −135° (col. 23, ll. 45–55). Raubvogel determines that operation of the left turn signal is required where the route calls for a left turn or left exit, and makes that determination when the vehicle is within a specified distance of the intersection or ramp (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to condition the determination that left turn signal operation is required on both the turn angle exceeding a threshold in the counter-clockwise direction and the turn start distance being less than a threshold distance. The two conditions perform distinct functions already present in the combination — the angle comparison determines which maneuver the route calls for and therefore which signal is required, the distance comparison determines when the signal is activated in advance of that maneuver — and combining them conjunctively yields no more than the predictable result of each performing its established function. MPEP 2143(I)(A). One of ordinary skill would have been further motivated by Suzuki's teaching that the angle determination distinguishes a genuine turn from a route continuing along the road ([0047], [0067]).).
Regarding claim 6, Raubvogel in view of Suzuki and Davidson teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising: determining that operation of a right turn signal is required by determining that the ego vehicle will make a right turn at the intersection, if the turn angle of the ego vehicle exceeds the predetermined angle in a clockwise direction and the turn start distance is less than the predetermined distance (Suzuki's threshold angles αi are measured as clockwise rotation angles from the straight-forward direction of the approach link, and are set at uniform 30° increments dividing the full 360° about the intersection into symmetric directional areas; the rightward area lies between α3 and α4, the leftward area between α9 and α10 ( [0051]). The angle θ of the guide route is +90° for an orthogonal right turn and −90° for an orthogonal left turn ([0049]), and the maneuver — "Turn right" or "Turn left" — is output according to the directional area in which θ falls ([0054]–[0055], [0067], [0069]). Davidson likewise classifies a turn symmetrically about the straight-ahead direction, a heading change of +45° to +135° being a right-hand turn and −45° to −135° a left-hand turn (col. 23, ll. 45–55). Raubvogel determines that operation of the right turn signal is required where the route calls for a right turn or right exit (col. 5, ll. 27–39; col. 7, ll. 1–5), and activates the appropriate signal at a specified distance before the maneuver location as specified by the route instructions (col. 6, ll. 5–7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine that right turn signal operation is required upon the turn angle exceeding the same threshold angle in the clockwise direction and the turn start distance being less than the same threshold distance. Both Suzuki and Davidson already resolve turn direction using angle criteria symmetric about the straight-ahead direction, so applying a threshold of equal magnitude in the opposite sense is nothing more than the use of those references' own classification schemes for the maneuver they were designed to distinguish. Raubvogel further applies a single specified activation distance to the maneuver location without regard to the direction of the maneuver, so using the same distance threshold for a right turn as for a left turn follows directly from its teaching. The result — activation of the right turn signal in the correct direction at an appropriate distance before the turn — is entirely predictable. MPEP 2143(I)(A).).
Claim(s) 9, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US 2021/0269024 A1). The rejection of claim 9 on this ground is presented in the alternative to the rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 102 set forth above. Claim 17 is rejected on this ground only.
Regarding claim 9, Fujita teaches the method of claim 8 as set forth above. Regarding the added limitation, upon the host vehicle arriving at the exiting illumination area — set from the positional relationship between the host vehicle entrance and the host vehicle exit based on the target route ([0055], [0075]) — a direction indicator is illuminated to indicate that the host vehicle is exiting the roundabout, that indicator being illuminated while the host vehicle is traveling on the circular roadway (steps S22 and S24, [0100], [0102]). The direction indicated is "opposite of the direction of rotation when the host vehicle is passing through the roundabout" ([0064]). Fujita teaches applying the method to right-side traffic, in which rotation through the circular roadway is left-turning ([0049], [0197]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply Fujita's exit-signal control to a roundabout having counterclockwise rotation, as Fujita expressly directs, whereby the signal illuminated on approach to the host vehicle exit is the right turn signal. MPEP 2143(I)(G).
Regarding claim 17, Fujita teaches the system of claim 16 as set forth above. Claim 17 recites the limitation of claim 9 in system form, performed by the recited controller, and is rejected for the same reasons. Fujita's second illumination area setting part 33b and turn signal control part 38 correspond to the recited controller ([0053]–[0055], [0060]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US 2021/0269024 A1) in view of Raubvogel (US 9,079,499 B1).
Regarding claim 18, Fujita teaches the system of claim 17, but does not expressly disclose wherein if the road information ahead indicates a highway entrance lane or a highway exit lane, the controller is configured to control the turn signal apparatus to operate the left turn signal or the right turn signal if it is determined that the ego vehicle will drive in a direction of the highway entrance lane or the exit lane, based on the driving path of the ego vehicle according to the navigation information. Fujita teaches a navigation device supplying road information ahead defined by nodes and links and including intersection positions and classifications, and a controller determining turn signal operation from that road information and the target route ([0034], [0047], [0058]). Fujita does not expressly disclose determining that turn signal operation is required in the direction of a highway entrance lane or exit lane.
Raubvogel teaches that where the road information ahead indicates a highway entrance or exit ramp, the navigation system transmits a signal causing the turn signal control system to activate the turn signal in the direction of that ramp based on the determined route — the right turn signal for a right exit and the left turn signal for a left exit (col. 5, ll. 47–57; col. 6, l. 61 – col. 7, l. 5), the specified maneuver location comprising an interchange, an entrance ramp, or an exit ramp (claim 13, col. 16, ll. 1–8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure Fujita's controller to activate the turn signal in the direction of a highway entrance or exit lane as taught by Raubvogel. Both references control a vehicle turn signal automatically from map data and a computed route; Fujita addresses roundabouts, and Raubvogel addresses intersections and entrance/exit ramps. Extending Fujita's route-based control to the additional road type taught by Raubvogel is the combination of prior art elements according to known methods, each continuing to perform its established function, with the predictable result of a turn signal system that signals correctly at ramps as well as roundabouts. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US 2021/0269024 A1) in view of Davidson (US 9,805,521 B1).
Regarding claim 19, Fujita teaches the system of claim 11, further comprising: a first sensor configured to detect surroundings of the ego vehicle, wherein the first sensor comprises at least one of a front camera, a front radar, or a corner radar (Fujita teaches the system of claim 11 as set forth above, and further teaches a first sensor configured to detect surroundings of the ego vehicle comprising at least one of a front camera or a front radar. Onboard sensor 1 includes camera 11, a surroundings recognition sensor acquiring host vehicle surroundings information such as lanes, preceding vehicles, and pedestrians, configured by combining a host vehicle forward recognition camera among others ([0024]–[0026]), and radar 12, a distance measurement sensor configured by combining host vehicle forward radar among others ([0027]–[0028]).).
However, Fujita does not expressly disclose second sensor configured to detect body information of the ego vehicle , wherein the second sensor comprises at least one of a steering angle sensor or a vehicle speed sensor.
Davidson teaches a vehicle equipped with a variety of vehicle sensors capable of generating vehicle telematics data, including sensors configured to make measurements and capture data pertaining to vehicle speed and vehicle heading (col. 5, l. 60 – col. 6, l. 15), and further teaches that such variable voltage sensors include vehicle speed sensors and vehicle heading sensors (col. 6, ll. 48–53), the captured data being used to identify and characterize vehicle turns at roadway intersections (col. 19, ll. 45–56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a vehicle speed sensor, as taught by Davidson, among the sensors of Fujita's vehicle. Fujita's controller generates a target vehicle speed profile including acceleration and deceleration profiles and outputs drive and braking command values to control the host vehicle along the target route ([0035]–[0039]), and Davidson teaches a conventional vehicle speed sensor for measuring that quantity. Adding a known sensor to obtain a measurement the system already uses is the combination of prior art elements according to known methods, each performing the same function it performed separately, with the predictable result of sensing vehicle speed. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Both references are directed to vehicle systems that control or evaluate vehicle behavior at roadway intersections using onboard sensors and map data, and Davidson is reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by Fujita. MPEP 2141.01(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAJSHEED O BLACK-CHILDRESS whose telephone number is (571)270-7838. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 10am to 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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/RAJSHEED O BLACK-CHILDRESS/Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights