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 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 (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 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, 3, 6-8, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102[a][1] as being anticipated by Yun et al. (US 20180328750 A1)
In regards to claim 1, Yun teaches, A computer-implemented method for controlling a driver assistance system for a vehicle, wherein the driver assistance system provides a stored parking or positioning maneuver along a stored trajectory, the method comprising the following steps: (See abstract, A method of controlling a vehicle, which is configured to be autonomously driven, includes determining a learned route based on a driving route that the vehicle has driven in a manual mode from a starting location to an ending location, driving the vehicle along the learned route in an autonomous mode, detecting a parking space based on driving the vehicle along the learned route in the autonomous mode, and based on a detection of the parking space in the learned route, parking the vehicle in the detected parking space…paragraph 247, The vehicle pulling-out system 740 may perform an operation of pulling the vehicle 100 out of a parking space…paragraph 283, the route 940 learned in the parking space 900 is used for parking and pulling-out of the vehicle 100)
a) receiving a radio signal to activate traversal of the stored trajectory, wherein the radio signal is received from a smartphone or another mobile electronic device of a user; (See paragraph 15, based on parking the vehicle in the detected parking space, storing information about a location of the detected parking space in a memory, in response to a user input, obtaining the information about the location of the parking space and information about the learned route from the memory, and controlling the vehicle to move out from the parking space to the ending location along at least a part of the learned route…paragraph 386, After the vehicle 100 is parked, the processor of the vehicle 100 receives a user input for pulling out the vehicle 100 through the user interface device 200…paragraph 250, The vehicle pulling-out system 740 may perform an operation of pulling the vehicle 100 out of a parking space, by providing a control signal to the vehicle drive device 600 in response to reception of a signal from an external device…paragraph 171, the external device may be a… a mobile terminal…paragraph 172, the communication device 400 may include at least one selected from among a transmission antenna, a reception antenna, a Radio Frequency (RF)…paragraph 390, it may occur that the vehicle 100 returns to a starting location before the vehicle 100 is parked in a parking slot, unlike FIG. 25. For example, after the user gets off the vehicle 100 at the starting location and the vehicle 100 starts to drive in a learned route in the autonomous mode, the user may want the vehicle 100 to return to the starting location again)
b) determining a new target position of the vehicle based on an ascertained current position of the user, or the smartphone or the other mobile electronic device of the user, wherein the new target position is determined by a point on the stored trajectory that is closest to the ascertained position of the user, or the smartphone or the other mobile electronic device of the user; and c) controlling the vehicle to traverse the stored trajectory to the determined new target position. (See paragraph 17, identifying a user of the vehicle, determining a location of the user, based on the location of the user, determining whether the user is located in the learned route, and based on a determination that the user is located in the learned route, controlling the vehicle to stop at the location of the identified user…paragraph 435, when it is determined that the new route 3140 cannot be generated, the processor of the vehicle 100 may designate a boarding location (e.g. a location closest to the user 3120) on the learned route to where the user will board, or may receive a boarding location from the user. the processor of the vehicle 100 may control the vehicle 100 to stop at the designated or the received boarding location.)
In regards to claim 3, Yun teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the current position of the user or the smartphone or the other mobile electronic device of the user is determined: (i)using a sensor system of the vehicle for an antenna-based localization method and/or (ii) using an object detection and distance determination using at least one distance sensor and/or using at least one vehicle camera.(Claimed “and/or” requires only one of the plurality of elements recited. See paragraph 430, when the vehicle 100 identifies a user 3020 in the learned driving route 3010 by the camera 310 or the communication device 400 during driving in a learned driving route 3010, the vehicle 100 stops in front of the identified user 3020 without driving to an ending location 3030. Also see paragraphs 133, 172, 175, 177, 431)
Claim 6 is similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
Claim 7 is similar in scope to claim 3, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
Claim 8 is similar in scope to claim 3, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
Claim 10 is similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
In regards to claim 11, Yun teaches the driver assistance system according to claim 6, wherein the vehicle maneuvers along the stored trajectory and, upon activation from outside the vehicle, moves to the new target position that is close to the current position of the user. (See paragraph 237, The processor of the vehicle 100 generates the pull-out route 2530 running from the parking slot to an ending location, including at least a part of the learned route, and controls pulling-out of the vehicle 100 along the generated pull-out route 2530…paragraph 430, FIG. 30 illustrates that when the vehicle 100 identifies a user 3020 in the learned driving route 3010 by the camera 310 or the communication device 400 during driving in a learned driving route 3010, the vehicle 100 stops in front of the identified user 3020 without driving to an ending location 3030…paragraph 250, The vehicle pulling-out system 740 may perform an operation of pulling the vehicle 100 out of a parking space, by providing a control signal to the vehicle drive device 600 in response to reception of a signal from an external device…paragraph 391, The processor of the vehicle 100 receives a user input requesting the vehicle 100 to return to the starting location or the ending location through the user interface device 200. Lastly see paragraph 435)
Claim 12 is similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, it is rejected under similar rationale as set forth above.
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.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 20180328750 A1) in view of IKEMOTO; Yu et al. (US 20180302741 A1)
In regards to claim 2, Yun teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the received radio signal represents the current position of the smartphone or the electronic device of the user, the current position being ascertained using a global navigation satellite system. (See paragraph 431, For user identification, a GPS module of the location information unit 420 or a method such as facial recognition or voice recognition may be used…paragraph 430, when the vehicle 100 identifies a user 3020 in the learned driving route 3010 by the camera 310 or the communication device 400 during driving in a learned driving route 3010, the vehicle 100 stops in front of the identified user 3020 without driving to an ending location 3030…paragraph 171, The communication device 400 is configured to perform communication with an external device. Here, the external device may be a nearby vehicle, a mobile terminal)
Yun does not specifically teach mobile terminal having own GPS to transmit its current location
Ikemoto further teaches this in paragraph 2, “most mobile terminals such as mobile phones have a positioning function such as Global Positioning System (GPS). Thus, users of the mobile terminals can acquire current positional information on the basis of positioning results of the mobile terminals and can receive various kinds of service information according to current positions of the users by transmitting the positioning results to communication providers or information distribution devices of service providers via networks.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the method of Yun to further comprise method taught by Ikemoto because user location accuracy can be improved by utilizing GPS mounted on mobile terminal instead of locating user via vehicle that is far distance away.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 20180328750 A1) in view of BÜSCHENFELD; Torsten et al. (US 20160362103 A1)
In regards to claim 5, Yun teaches the method according to claim 1.
Yun does not specifically teach, wherein the stored trajectory is displayed on a display device of the vehicle and/or sent to the smartphone and/or the electronic device of the user, after activation of a function with the new target position by the user.
Buschenfeld further teaches, wherein the stored trajectory is displayed on a display device of the vehicle and/or sent to the smartphone and/or the electronic device of the user, after activation of a function with the new target position by the user. (See paragraph 27, After a relatively long waiting time, the user 16 transmits, via a Smartphone 32, a request 34 for further use to the motor vehicle 14. As a result, the motor vehicle 14 is activated at the parking position C. The motor vehicle 14 transmits the trajectory 24 which has been travelled along as a conditioned data set 36 to the Smartphone 32…The user 16 causes the trajectory 24 to be displayed, with a representation of the multi-story car park 10 superimposed therein, on the Smartphone 32…claim 7, illustrating the trajectory on a user's mobile communication device with surroundings information superimposed thereon.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the method of Yun to further comprise method taught by Buschenfeld because displaying the trajectory on mobile communication device allows the user to define the transfer location in the context of a surrounding area, or knows the location of the vehicle in this context, therefore, improving user experience using the feature (paragraph 21).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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 at (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.
/JUSTIN S LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights