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 .
Summary
This communication is a First Office Action Non-Final Rejection on the merits.
Claims 1 – 20 are currently pending and considered below.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 7, 10, 13 – 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al. (Hereinafter Gordon) (US 2018/0029522 A1) in view of Ng et al. (Hereinafter Ng) (US 20228/0135075 A1).
As per claim 1, Gordon teaches the limitations of:
A collision avoidance and mitigation system (CAMS) (See at least paragraph 59; a defined condition can include any suitable defined condition under which one or more drone devices 502 are needed to substitute for or augment one or more lights of a vehicle 518. For example, a defined condition can include a weather condition (e.g., rain, snow, fog, ice, wind, flooding, sand storm, dust storm, and/or any other suitable weather condition) that could cause poor vehicle operator visibility, slippery road condition, increased vehicle stopping distance, unexpected vehicle movement (e.g., vehicle lane change, vehicle swerving, vehicle braking, vehicle turning, vehicle sliding, vehicle speed change, and/or any other suitable unexpected vehicle movement), and/or any other suitable unsafe vehicle operating condition produced by a weather condition. In another example, a defined condition can include a vehicle 518 condition (e.g., a vehicle electronic system fault, a vehicle mechanical malfunction, an external indicator light malfunction, a headlight malfunction, a worn out brake, a flat tire, a cracked or broken window, anti-lock braking system activation, traction control system activation, airbag activation, a shift to low gear, vehicle reversing, activation of cruise control, lane departure warning, emergency brake assist system activation, collision avoidance system activation, and/or any other suitable vehicle condition) that could cause poor vehicle operator visibility, cause lack of external indication of vehicle operation to other vehicles, increased vehicle stopping distance, unexpected vehicle movement or any other suitable unsafe vehicle operating condition produced by vehicle 518 condition), the CAMS comprising:
a deployable drone including at least one of a first sensor or a first camera that has a first field of view, the at least one of the first sensor or the first camera configured to acquire first CAMS data (See at least paragraph 30; A drone device can include a power source, non-limiting examples of which include one or more batteries, one or more fuel cells, natural gas, compressed air, diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, propane, nuclear power system, solar power system, piezoelectric power system, and/or any other suitable power source. A drone device can include, but are not limited to, one or more computers, one or more processors, one or more memories, and one or more programs. A drone device can communicate via any suitable form of wireless or wired communication using a communication device. Non-limiting examples of wireless communication can include, but are not limited to, radio communication, optical communication, sonic communication, electromagnetic induction communication, and/or any other suitable wireless communication. A drone device can include one or more instruments, non-limiting examples of which include a communication device, a radio frequency identification (RFID) reader, navigation device, a sensor, a camera, a video camera, a three-dimensional camera, a global positioning system (GPS) device, a motion sensor, a radar device, a temperature sensor, a light sensor, a thermal imaging device, an infrared camera, an audio sensor, an ultrasound imaging device, a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, sound navigation and ranging (SONAR) device, a microwave sensor, a chemical sensor, a radiation sensor, an electromagnetic field sensor, a pressure sensor, a spectrum analyzer, a scent sensor, a moisture sensor, a biohazard sensor, a gyroscope, an altimeter, a microscope, magnetometer, a device capable is seeing through or inside of objects, and/or any other suitable instruments.);
a CAMS module including:
one or more processing circuits configured to (See at least paragraph 48; Vehicle 518 can include any vehicle as disclosed herein. Server device 520 can be any computing device that can be communicatively coupled to drone device 502, non-limiting example of which can include a server computer, a computer, a mobile computer, a control system, a collision avoidance system, a weather computer, an emergency system, a communication system, a warning system, a radar system, a traffic system, and/or any other suitable computing device. User equipment 522 can be any device employed by a user, non-limiting examples of which include a vehicle, safety equipment, a communication device, a server device, and/or any other suitable device that can be employed by a user. It is to be appreciated that user equipment 522 can be equipped with a communication device that enable a user and/or the user equipment 522 to communicate with drone device 502 over network 516. Furthermore, drone devices 502, 524, vehicle 518, server device 520, and user equipment 522 can be equipped with communication devices that enable communication between drone devices 502, 524, vehicles 518, server devices 520, and user equipment 522 over one or more networks 516.):
acquire the first CAMS data regarding an approaching vehicle (See at least paragraph 4; A drone device, comprising: a drone device is provided. The drone device can comprise a memory that stores computer executable components; and a processor that executes the computer executable components stored in the memory. The computer executable components can comprise a monitoring component that determines a defined region around a vehicle and monitors the defined region for one or more conditions. The computer executable components can also comprises a response component that causes the drone device to perform one or more actions to mitigate a condition in response to detection of the condition.);
evaluate a threat level of the approaching vehicle based on the first CAMS data (See at least paragraph 61; monitoring component 602 can assign respective risk levels to defined conditions. Furthermore, monitoring component 602 can employ a utility analysis based on determined respective risks associated with defined conditions along with monitoring criteria to determine which defined conditions pose a risk to a vehicle 518 or object. In a non-limiting example, monitoring criteria can be a function based on one or more thresholds associated with risk levels of defined conditions.); and
transmit an alert signal to at least one of an alert system associated with the CAMS module, the approaching vehicle, or a portable device associated with the CAMS module in response to the threat level exceeding a threat threshold (See at least paragraph 61 and 69; monitoring component 602 can assign respective risk levels to defined conditions. Furthermore, monitoring component 602 can employ a utility analysis based on determined respective risks associated with defined conditions along with monitoring criteria to determine which defined conditions pose a risk to a vehicle 518 or object. In a non-limiting example, monitoring criteria can be a function based on one or more thresholds associated with risk levels of defined conditions. … FIG. 9E illustrates drone device 502 with a display device displaying the text “SLOW” to indicate that vehicle 802a is slowing its speed and/or that the operator of vehicle 802b should slow the speed of vehicle 802b. FIG. 8F illustrates drone device 502 with a display device displaying the text “ANIMAL ON LEFT” to indicate that there is an animal within the defined region of vehicle 802a to the left of vehicle 802a. It is to be appreciated the drone device 502 with a display device can display additional text or images to provide more information to the operator of vehicle 802b regarding the animal, such as an indication of type of animal, number of animals, and/or any other suitable information regarding the animals FIG. 9G illustrates drone device 502 with a display device displaying the international symbol for warning to indicate a warning to the operator of vehicle 802b and/or to indicate that the hazard light of vehicle 802a is activated).
Gordon does not explicitly teach the limitation of:
a housing; and
at least one of a second sensor or a second camera that is supported by the housing and has a second field of view, the at least one of the second sensor or the second camera configured to acquire second CAMS data, wherein the second field of view is outside of a vision range of the first field of view.
Ng teaches the limitations of:
a housing (See at least figure 8A); and
at least one of a second sensor or a second camera that is supported by the housing and has a second field of view, the at least one of the second sensor or the second camera configured to acquire second CAMS data, wherein the second field of view is outside of a vision range of the first field of view (See at least figure 8A and 8B).
PNG
media_image1.png
652
989
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
632
995
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include a housing; and at least one of a second sensor or a second camera that is supported by the housing and has a second field of view, the at least one of the second sensor or the second camera configured to acquire second CAMS data, wherein the second field of view is outside of a vision range of the first field of view as taught by Ng in the system of Gordon, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 2, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the CAMS module is configured to be mounted on a blocker vehicle (See at least Ng, see at least figure 8C).
As per claim 3, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the deployable drone is configured to be stored on and deployable from the blocker vehicle (Gordon, see at least paragraph 26).
As per claim 4, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the alert system includes at least one of a light, a speaker, or a display on the blocker vehicle (Ng, see at least paragraph 110 and 182 - 186).
As per claim 5, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the alert signal is configured to activate or cause a change to the alert system (Ng, see at least paragraph 110 and 182 - 186)..
As per claim 6, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the deployable drone includes a GPS system, and wherein the one or more processing circuits are configured to instruct the deployable drone to travel to a predetermined location upstream of the blocker vehicle, prior to acquiring the first CAMS data (Gordon, see at least paragraph 30 and 40).
As per claim 7, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the one or more processing circuits are configured to:
acquire the second CAMS data (Ng, see at least paragraph 47); and
identify, via the first CAMS data, the approaching vehicle in the second CAMS data (Gordon, see at least paragraph 4, and Ng, see at least paragraph 47) .
As per claim 10, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the threat level of the approaching vehicle based on the first CAMS data is a preliminary threat level, and the one or more processing circuits are configured to:
acquire the second CAMS data regarding the approaching vehicle (Ng, see at least paragraph 47);
evaluate a final threat level of the approaching vehicle based on the second CAMS data (Ng, see at least paragraph 47); and
transmit the alert signal to the at least one of the alert system, the approaching vehicle, or the portable device in response to the preliminary threat level or the final threat level exceeding the threat threshold (Gordon, see at least paragraph 61 and 69, and Ng, see at least paragraph 110 and 182 – 186).
As per claim 13, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the threat level of the approaching vehicle based on the first CAMS data is a preliminary threat level, and the one or more processing circuits are configured to transmit a pre-alert signal to at least one of the alert system, the approaching vehicle, or the portable device in response to the preliminary threat level exceeding a preliminary threat threshold (Gordon, see at least paragraph 61 and 69).
As per claim 14, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the one or more processing circuits are configured to:
acquire the second CAMS data regarding the approaching vehicle (Ng, see at least paragraph 47);
evaluate a final threat level of the approaching vehicle based on the second CAMS data (Ng, see at least paragraph 47); and
transmit the alert signal to the at least one of the alert system, the approaching vehicle, or the portable device in response to the final threat level exceeding the threat threshold (Ng, see at least paragraph 110 and 182 – 186).
As per claim 15, the combination of Gordon and Ng teaches the limitation of:
wherein the one or more processing circuits are configured to transmit the alert signal to at least two of the alert system, the approaching vehicle, or the portable device (Ng, see at least paragraph 110 and 182 - 186).
Regarding claims 16 – 18 and 20:
Claims 16 – 18 and 20 are rejected using the same rationale, mutatis mutandis, applied to claims 1 – 7, 10, 13 – 15 above, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 – 9, 11 – 12 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kernwein et al. (US 2026/0274316 A1) discloses intersection management system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IG T AN whose telephone number is (571)270-5110. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 10:00AM- 4:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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.
IG T AN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3662
/IG T AN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights