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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on September 17, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
At [0041], “for purposes relate or unrelated to evaluating driving style” appears to be intended as “for purposes related or unrelated to evaluating driving style”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ross et al., U.S. Patent 9,884,630 B1 (2018).
As to claim 1, Ross et al. discloses a method, comprising:
presenting, to a passenger of a first autonomous vehicle among a population of autonomous vehicles, a user interface (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21);
prompting, via the user interface, the passenger to rate a plurality of aspects of driving characteristics by the first autonomous vehicle during a trip of the passenger (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21);
receiving, from the passenger and via the user interface, ratings of the plurality of aspects (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21); and
adjusting, based at least in part on the ratings, operations of a second autonomous vehicle among the population of autonomous vehicles (Column 15, Lines 20-57).
As to claim 2, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the user interface is presented on a mobile device of the passenger (Column 17, Line 51 – Column 18, Line 3).
As to claim 3, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes following distance (Column 13, Lines 47-67).
As to claim 4, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes braking (Column 7, Line 44 – Column 8, Line 7).
As to claim 5, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes accelerating (Column 5, Lines 38-56).
As to claim 6, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes navigating to avoid obstacles (Column 3, Lines 3-23, Column 12, Lines 3-18).
As to claim 7, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the adjusting is via a server remote to both the first autonomous vehicle and the second autonomous vehicle (Column 4, Lines 23-59).
As to claim 8, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 7, and further discloses further comprising:
collecting, via a sensor system configured on the first autonomous vehicle, information regarding operational aspects of the first autonomous vehicle during the trip (Column 5, Lines 38-56).
As to claim 9, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 8, and further discloses wherein the adjusting is further based on an analysis of the information regarding the operational aspects of the first autonomous vehicle during the trip (Column 7, Lines 44 – Column 8, Line 7).
As to claim 10, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 9, and further discloses wherein the adjusting includes sending a warning to an occupant of the second autonomous vehicle (Column 12, Lines 19-50).
As to claim 11, Ross et al. discloses the method of claim 10, and further discloses wherein the warning is configured to cause an occupant of the second autonomous vehicle to control the second autonomous vehicle (Column 10, Lines 1-13, Column 8, Lines 8-25).
As to claim 12, Ross et al. discloses a system, comprising:
a display configured to display a user interface (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21), wherein the user interface is configured to:
prompt, a passenger of a first autonomous vehicle among a population of autonomous vehicles, to rate a plurality of aspects of driving characteristics of the first autonomous vehicle during a trip of the passenger (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21); and
receive, from the passenger, ratings of the plurality of aspects (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21); and
at least one processor configured to control a second autonomous vehicle among the population of autonomous vehicles based at least in part on the ratings (Column 15, Lines 20-57).
As to claim 13, Ross et al. discloses the system of claim 12, and further discloses wherein the user interface is presented on a mobile device of the passenger (Column 17, Line 51 – Column 18, Line 3).
As to claim 14, Ross et al. discloses the system of claim 13, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes following distance, braking, accelerating, or navigating to avoid obstacles, or any combination thereof (Column 7, Line 44 – Column 8, Line 7, Column 5, Lines 38-56).
As to claim 15, Ross et al. discloses the system of claim 14, and further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured in a server remote to both the first autonomous vehicle and the second autonomous vehicle (Column 4, Lines 23-59).
As to claim 16, Ross et al. discloses the system of claim 15, and further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to analyze information, collected by a sensor system configured on the first autonomous vehicle, regarding operational aspects of the first autonomous vehicle during the trip to control the second autonomous vehicle (Column 7, Lines 44 – Column 8, Line 7).
As to claim 17, Ross et al. discloses the system of claim 16, and further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to control second autonomous vehicle via sending a warning to an occupant of the second autonomous vehicle (Column 12, Lines 19-50).
As to claim 18, Ross et al. discloses a non-transitory computer storage medium storing instructions which, when executed in a computing device, cause the computing device to perform a method, comprising:
presenting, to a passenger of a first autonomous vehicle among a population of autonomous vehicles, a user interface (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21);
prompting, via the user interface, the passenger to rate a plurality of aspects of driving characteristics of the first autonomous vehicle during a trip of the passenger (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21); and
receiving, from the passenger and via the user interface, ratings of the plurality of aspects (Column 13, Line 47 – Column 14, Line 21);
wherein the ratings cause adjustments in operations of a second autonomous vehicle among the population of autonomous vehicles (Column 15, Lines 20-57).
As to claim 19, Ross et al. discloses the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 18, and further discloses wherein the user interface is presented on a mobile device of the passenger (Column 17, Line 51 – Column 18, Line 3).
As to claim 20, Ross et al. discloses the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 19, and further discloses wherein the plurality of aspects includes following distance, braking, accelerating, or navigating to avoid obstacles, or any combination thereof (Column 7, Line 44 – Column 8, Line 7, Column 5, Lines 38-56).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The publication of the present application is cited. The issued patent of the parent application is cited. Wheeler et al. is cited as disclosing a similar system that works in a different manner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL BERNS whose telephone number is (313)446-4892. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 - 5:00.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. 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.
MICHAEL BERNS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3667
/MICHAEL A BERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights