Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2024-10-08)
Rejection types: 101 - Patent-Eligible Subject Matter, 102 - Lack of Novelty

CLAIMS:
What is claimed is:
1\. A control device controlling a velocity of a vehicle, the control device comprising: a scene determination unit determining a scene in which a visibility is limited by an occluding object at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road, the scene determination unit further determining whether the vehicle on the traveling road has a right of way; and a control unit controlling the velocity of the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection when the vehicle on the traveling road has no right of way.
2\. The control device according to claim 1, further comprising: a virtual moving object setting unit setting, within an area occluded by the occluding object, an intersecting moving object at a position closest to the intersection; and a velocity evaluation unit setting a velocity of the intersecting moving object, wherein, in response to the vehicle on the traveling road being determined to have the right of way, the control unit controls the velocity of the vehicle to not collide with the intersecting moving object based on the position and the velocity of the intersecting moving object.
3\. The control device according to claim 2, wherein the velocity evaluation unit sets a reasonably foreseeable velocity as the velocity of the intersecting moving object.
4\. The control device according to claim 3, wherein, when the intersecting moving object is closer to the intersection than the vehicle, the velocity evaluation unit sets, as the reasonably foreseeable velocity of the intersecting moving object, at least one of (i) a maximum velocity under a condition that the intersecting moving object can stop immediately before the intersection, (ii) a legal speed, (iii) an average value of velocities of vehicles travelling on a same road as the intersecting moving object, (iv) a maximum value among the velocities of the vehicles travelling on the same road as the intersecting moving object, or (v) a minimum velocity among the velocities (i) to (iv), and the control unit controls the vehicle to travel at the velocity, an upper limit of which is set to avoid a collision with the intersecting moving object.
5\. The control device according to claim 3, wherein, when the vehicle is closer to the intersection than the intersecting moving object, the velocity evaluation unit sets, as the reasonably foreseeable velocity of the intersecting moving object, at least one of (i) a maximum velocity under a condition that the intersecting moving object can stop immediately before the intersection, (ii) a legal speed, (iii) an average value of velocities of vehicles travelling on a same road as the intersecting moving object, (iv) a maximum value among the velocities of the vehicles travelling on the same road as the intersecting moving object, or (v) a maximum velocity among the velocities (i) to (iv), and the control unit controls the vehicle to travel at the velocity, a lower limit of which is set to avoid a collision with the intersecting moving object.
6\. The control device according to claim 2, wherein, when the visibility is limited by multiple occluding objects, for each of areas occluded by the multiple occluding objects, the virtual moving object setting unit sets the intersecting moving object at the position closest to the intersection, the velocity evaluation unit sets the velocity of each intersecting moving object, and the control unit controls the velocity of the vehicle to not collide with each intersecting moving object based on the position and the velocity of each intersecting moving object.
7\. The control device according to claim 1, wherein, when a distance from the intersection to a visible area of the intersecting road, which is not occluded by the occluding object, becomes longer than a predetermined threshold as the vehicle approaches the intersection, the control unit controls the velocity of the vehicle based on detection data of an intersecting moving object traveling on the intersecting road.
8\. A control device controlling a velocity of a vehicle, the control device comprising: a virtual moving object setting unit setting, in a scene where a visibility is limited by an occluding object at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road, an intersecting moving object at a position closest to the intersection within an area occluded by the occluding object; a velocity evaluation unit setting a velocity of the intersecting moving object; and a control unit controlling the velocity of the vehicle to not collide with the intersecting moving object based on the position and the velocity of the intersecting moving object.
9\. A control method that controls a traveling of a vehicle, the control method comprising: identifying, with a control device, a scene where a visibility is limited at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road; determining, with the control device, whether the vehicle has a right of way at the intersection; and controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection in response to determining that the vehicle has no right of way at the intersection.
10\. A control method that controls a traveling of a vehicle, the control method comprising: identifying, with a control device, a scene where a visibility is limited by an occluding object at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road; assuming, with the control device, an intersecting moving object in an area occluded by the occluding object in the scene where the visibility is limited at the intersection; assuming, with the control device, a velocity of the intersecting moving object; and controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to not collide with the intersecting moving object based on the assumed intersecting moving object.
11\. A control program product stored in a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium, the control program comprising instructions to be executed by at least one processor of a control device for controlling a velocity of a vehicle, the instructions comprising: identifying, with the control device, a scene where a visibility is limited at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road; determining, with the control device, whether the vehicle has a right of way at the intersection; and controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection in response to determining that the vehicle has no right of way at the intersection.
12\. A control program product stored in a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium, the control program comprising instructions to be executed by at least one processor of a control device for controlling a velocity of a vehicle, the instructions comprising: setting, with the control device, an intersecting moving object in a scene where a visibility is limited by an occluding object at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road, the intersecting moving object being set at a position closest to the intersection within an area occluded by the occluding object; setting, with the control device, a velocity of the intersecting moving object; and controlling, with the control device, the velocity of the vehicle to not collide with the intersecting moving object based on the position and velocity of the intersecting moving object.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .
1.	This application has been examined.  Claims 1-12 are pending.
2.	Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
3.	The IDS filed 1/4/23 has been considered.
Claim Interpretation
4.	The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.  The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A)	the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder (“unit”) that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.  Such claim limitation(s) is/are: scene determination unit in claim 1; virtual moving object setting unit, velocity evaluation unit in claims 2 and 8. Note “control unit” uses the modifier “control” which, given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is considered a structural element capable of performing the claimed function (i.e., accelerator/brake pedal).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may:  (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
5.	35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a 2 step inquiry:
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), see MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: see MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? see MPEP 2106.05
Taking claim 9 as exemplary:
Step 1: Claim 9 is directed to a method which falls under the category of process/method.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 9 is directed to a control method that controls a traveling of a vehicle.
A control method that controls a traveling of a vehicle, the control method comprising:
identifying, with a control device, a scene where a visibility is limited at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road;
determining, with the control device, whether the vehicle has a right of way at the intersection; and
controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection in response to determining that the vehicle has no right of way at the intersection.
The limitations in bold represent “mental processes” that under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers processes which may be performed in the human mind.  For example, a driver of a vehicle approaching an intersection evaluates the scene before the driver and judges how to proceed (“right-of-way”) based on traffic indicators (i.e., traffic lights, signs, crosswalks, other vehicles, etc.) and established traffic regulations.  Each of these limitations recited above, given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, are directed toward the mental processes grouping of abstract ideas because they are concepts capable of being performed in the human mind including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion.
Step 2A, Prong 2:  The claim further recites the step shown in italics to control the vehicle to stop before the intersection if the vehicle does not have the right of way.  This step is the natural response of the driver when it is judged that the driver must stop because of a traffic signal or stop sign.  This step is deemed to be insignificant post-solution activity insofar as it does not impose a meaningful limitation on the abstract idea.   The claim also recites that the steps are performed “with a control device” (see underlined text); however, the limitation is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., general purpose computer/processor) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.  Further, looking at the additional limitations as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitations add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.  For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is no more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. (See MPEP § 2106.05).  Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.  The claim as a whole represents nothing more than the mental thought processes of a driver approaching an intersection and judging how to proceed based on traffic indicators and known traffic regulations.
Step 2B: Regarding Step 2B, claim 9 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons as those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.  As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component (“control device”) cannot provide an inventive concept.  Furthermore, as discussed above, the additional step of controlling the vehicle amounts to no more than what is well-understood, routine and conventional activity (see for example Petroff et al. (US 2021/0061269): [0036- “If the processor determines that a stop line position exists in the path of travel between the autonomous vehicle and the intersection, it may determine whether a stop condition exists (step 405). A stop condition may be, for example, that a stop sign is positioned at the intersection, or that a traffic signal at the intersection has an active red light”]). Hence, the claim as a whole is not patent eligible.
As per claim 10, the claim also falls into the category of process/method and as similarly noted above the steps of identifying and assuming that a vehicle may be approaching from a blind spot set forth mental processes performed by a driver approaching an intersection and observing the surrounding environment including blind spots, judging how to safely proceed according to the traffic indicators, road markings, other vehicles, etc. and to proceed in a safe manner to avoid colliding with another vehicle.
As per claims 11 and 12, the claims fall into the category of manufacture.  The analysis is the same as noted above for claims 9 and 10 whereby the claims recite general purpose computing elements (storage medium, processor), at a high-level of generality, to execute the abstract idea such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component(s).
Thus, claims 10-12 are also deemed to be not patent eligible.
6.	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.
7.	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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by Petroff et al. (US 2021/0061269).
A.	As per claim 1, Petroff discloses:
A control device controlling a velocity of a vehicle (Fig. 2:220), the control device comprising:
a scene determination unit determining a scene in which a visibility is limited by an occluding object at an intersection where a traveling road of the vehicle intersects with an intersecting road (Fig. 1)[0004- Before the vehicle reaches the intersection, the system will analyze data collected by the sensors to determine whether the data indicates that an occlusion exists that occludes the sensors' ability to detect whether an object exists in the second lane within a target distance of the intersection], the scene determination unit further determining whether the vehicle on the traveling road has a right of way [0033-The processor may determine a stop line 305, which is a line at which the AV 102 must stop forward movement before proceeding through the intersection]; and
a control unit controlling the velocity of the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection when the vehicle on the traveling road has no right of way [0033- the vehicle's rules for operation may require the AV 102 stop at the stop line 305 in all instances such as if a stop sign is positioned at the intersection 110; require the AV 102 to stop at the stop line 305 in some instances such as if a traffic signal positioned at the intersection 110 has an active red light].
B.	As per claim 2, as above whereby Petroff further discloses at [0004] “If the processor determines an occlusion exists, the system will monitor the second lane for potential conflicting obstacles. To do this, the system will: (i) generate a phantom obstacle that is positioned behind the occlusion and that is moving toward the intersection in the second lane; (ii) generate a predicted speed of the phantom obstacle; and (iii) use the predicted speed of the phantom obstacle to determine whether the phantom obstacle is expected to reach the conflict region before the vehicle will pass through the conflict region … If the phantom obstacle is expected to reach the conflict region before the vehicle will pass through the conflict region, the system will instead cause the vehicle to take a safety-related action before permitting the vehicle to enter the intersection” and at  [0005] “If the vehicle takes a safety-related action, one such action may include: (i) reducing the speed of the travel of the vehicle”.
C.	As per claims 3-5, as above whereby Petroff sets the speed of the virtual moving object based on at least the legal speed limit for the road/lane [0041- if an occlusion is detected within the target distance along any of the route in step 409, the processor may cause the vehicle to generate a phantom obstacle that is positioned behind the occlusion within the intersecting lane and that is moving toward the intersection in the intersecting lane (step 411). The phantom obstacle will be a virtual obstacle that is moving toward the intersection] and [0042- the system will generate a predicted speed (step 412) for the obstacle. The predicted speed may be, for example, a speed limit that is assigned to the lane (as retrieved from accessed map data), a default speed (as stored in a rules set) or a speed predicted by any other suitable method].  Petroff further discloses controlling the speed based on whether or not the AV will reach the intersection first [0045- If in step 413 the system determines that the vehicle will not likely clear the conflict region before the obstacle reaches it, the processor may take a safety related action such as decelerate (reduce the speed of travel); 0047- if the system determines that a phantom obstacle and/or real obstacle will reach the conflict region before the vehicle clears it, the system may permit the AV to pass through the intersection if it can safely do so by accelerating].
D.	As per claim 6, as above whereby Petroff addresses situations with multiple occlusions and multiple virtual moving objects based on the operating environment [0050- in practice an AV system may consider multiple conflict regions as the vehicle approaches and moves through an intersection; 0051- since conflict regions 518 and 519 also exist, the system also may analyze the lanes associated with the other conflict regions before assessing whether and how to proceed. If an occlusion exists within the target distance associated with either of those areas, the system may stop or limit speed of the AV before allowing the AV to pass into the intersection and through conflict region 517].
E.	As per claim 7, as above whereby the scope of the claim is interpreted as covering the situation of a “normal” operation whereby the vehicle is approaching an intersection having no occlusions and the vehicle uses sensors to monitor an intersecting moving vehicle to determine how to safely proceed at the intersection [0030- When the on-board computing device 220 detects a moving object, the on-board computing device 220 will generate one or more possible object trajectories for the detected object, and analyze the possible object trajectories to assess the risk of a collision between the object and the AV. If the risk exceeds an acceptable threshold, the on-board computing device 220 performs operations to determine whether the collision can be avoided if the AV follows a defined vehicle trajectory and/or implements one or more dynamically generated emergency maneuvers in a specified time period (e.g., N milliseconds). If the collision can be avoided, then the on-board computing device 220 may cause the vehicle 200 to perform a cautious maneuver (e.g., mildly slow down, accelerate, or swerve). In contrast, if the collision cannot be avoided, then the on-board computing device 220 will cause the vehicle 200 to take an emergency maneuver (e.g., brake and/or change direction of travel)].  Also at [0039- if no occlusion exists between the vehicle and a target distance from the intersection along any of the intersection's routes, the processor may cause the vehicle to monitor the conflicting lane for real obstacles (step 410) using sensors such as cameras, LiDAR systems and other sensors].
F.	As per claim 8, as noted above for claims 1 and 2 with regard to the use of virtual moving objects within occluded regions (Petroff: [0041- if an occlusion is detected within the target distance along any of the route in step 409, the processor may cause the vehicle to generate a phantom obstacle that is positioned behind the occlusion within the intersecting lane and that is moving toward the intersection in the intersecting lane (step 411). The phantom obstacle will be a virtual obstacle that is moving toward the intersection].
G.	As per claims 9 and 10, as noted above for claims 1 and 8, respectively, whereby the control device performs the actions as detailed above.
H.	As per claims 11 and 12, as noted above for claims 1, 8, 9 and 10 whereby the functions are stored on a computer readable medium for execution by a computing device (Petroff: [0060- various hardware elements that may be included in any of the electronic components of the system, such as internal processing systems of the AV … Processor 905 is a central processing device of the system, configured to perform calculations and logic operations required to execute programming instructions. As used in this document and in the claims, the terms “processor” and “processing device” may refer to a single processor or any number of processors in a set of processors that collectively perform a set of operations … Various embodiments of the invention may include a computer-readable medium containing programming instructions that are configured to cause one or more processors, print devices and/or scanning devices to perform the functions described in the context of the previous figures].
8.	The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.  In particular,
• Ogino (US 2021/0263519)- vehicle assist system which determines that an upcoming intersection has a blind spot; may control velocity as the intersection is approached (Fig. 9).
• Joseph et al. (US 2021/0155241)- vehicle system which determines right-of-way at an intersection; image sensor detects stop signs or traffic signals as well as stop lines painted on the road; the vehicle upon detecting a stop line stops the vehicle; determines vehicle right-of-way order among vehicles at an intersection; vehicle proceeds when vehicle is determined to have right-of-way; ECU performs determination and control functions; driver assist system automatically stops vehicle at stop line; system may classify intersection to determine right-of-way; may use image and/or map data to classify intersection [0013]; application in autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles [0017].  The reference is deemed to disclose the limitations set forth in claims 1, 9 and 11 except for a scene determination unit which determines scene having limited visibility due to occluding object(s).
• CN112829762 (intervening reference)- autonomous vehicle senses a blind area relative to an intersection; generates a virtual object moving in the blind area and generates a target speed of the autonomous vehicle based on the virtual moving body and environmental information around the autonomous vehicle; sets predicted speed of virtual moving body (translation: “obtaining the road speed limit value of the road of the virtual mobile body; determining the road speed limit value as the estimated moving speed of the virtual mobile body”).
• Satomura (US 2020/0035102)- drive assist system which determines right-of-way priorities at an intersection; uses images of environment obtained by on-board camera; road sign recognition; recognizes road characteristics (i.e., white lines, road shape, intersecting roads, etc.); assigns priority to each road/lane; detects whether obstacle is blocking view of intersection [0090]; applies brakes if there is a risk of collision.
• Silva et al. (US 2019/0384302)- autonomous vehicle control system for operating in occluded environments; generates grid indicating occlusions and visible areas; uses lidar or image sensors to create occlusion field and perform occlusion based planning for controlling the autonomous vehicle; may predict trajectories of occluded objects.
• Raghu (US 9,459,623)- control of AV through a stop sign intersection; stop sign location may be obtained from map data, rf signals transmitted by sign or image recognition; uses prioritization scheme to determine right-of-way at intersection.
• Ferguson et al. (US 8,761,991)- autonomous vehicle which negotiates an intersection using sensor data to determine state of traffic; addresses occlusion of objects such as traffic signs and signals.
• McNew et al. (US 2009/0109061)- determination of right-of-way at an intersection based on predetermined rules [0017]; determination made off-board and right-of-way indication transmitted to mobile object at the intersection (i.e., roadside unit).
• Lin et al. (Decision Making through Occluded Intersections for Autonomous
Driving)- navigating autonomous vehicle at unsignalized intersection including situations where the intersection may have limited visibility or occlusions; discusses using virtual vehicles in occluded regions.
• Narksri et al. (Crossing Blind Intersections from a Full Stop Using Estimated
Visibility of Approaching Vehicles)- autonomous driving in urban areas having intersections with low visibility; considers occlusions caused by structures which interfere with proper view of surrounding environment; evaluates lidar scan data.
• Orzechowski et al. (Tackling Occlusions & Limited Sensor Range with
Set-based Safety Verification)- autonomous navigation in an environment having occluded objects/regions.
9.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
In response to the Office Action dated October 8, 2024, Claims 1 and 8-12 have been amended. Claims 13-16 have been added. No new matter is believed to have been added by way of these amendments and new claims.
Accordingly, Claims 1-16 are currently pending for consideration. Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration in view of the remarks set forth below.
A.
Claim Inter
p
retation under 35 U.S.C.
§
f)
The Office Action alleges that the claims invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) because the claims allegedly recite a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Applicant does not concede to the Office's assertion that the claims invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) but acquiesces to the claims being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) for examination purposes.
B.
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C.
X101
The following remarks are not to be used for claim construction or any other similar purpose, but are presented solely in connection with the § 101 analysis. Applicant further reserves the rights to make additional arguments.
The Office Action asserts that the Claims 9-12 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claims are allegedly directed to non-statutory subject matter. Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejection and disagrees that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, as alleged by the Office.
Further, Claim 9 recites "controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection", which is not a mental process that can be performed in the human mind. Rather, "controlling, with the control device, the vehicle to stop immediately before the intersection", is an integration of the alleged abstract idea into a practical application, which renders Claim 9 eligible subject matter. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration in view of the above remarks.
Notwithstanding the above remarks, Claim 16 has also been added which depends from Claim 9 and further integrates the alleged abstract idea into a practical application. Reconsideration in view of the new dependent claim is respectfully requested.
C.
Claim Re
j
ections under 35 U.S.C.
&
Claims 1-12 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by U.S. 2021/0061269 to Petroff et al. (hereinafter "Petroff').
Rationale of 35 U.S.C.
"For a prior art reference to anticipate a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102, every element of the claimed subject matter must be
identically shown
in a single reference." Diversitech Corp. v. Century Steps, Inc., 850 F.2d 675, 677, 7 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1315, 1317 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (emphasis added). Further, the elements must be "arranged and combined as required by the claim." Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Independent Claim 1
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejection of Claim 1 but has amended the claim to expedite allowance. As amended, Claim 1 recites in part:
a control unit controlling the velocity of the vehicle by setting a maximum
velocity, as an upper limit velocity of the vehicle, at which the vehicle can stop immediately before the intersection when the vehicle on the traveling road has no
right of way.
Applicant respectfully asserts that Petroff fails to disclose at least the above feature(s) of amended Claim 1. For example, Petroff does not teach the feature(s) "setting a maximum velocity, as an upper limit velocity of the vehicle, at which the vehicle can stop immediately before the intersection".
In the rejection of Claim 1, the Office asserts that Petroff at [0033] teaches "the vehicle's rules for operation may require the AV 102 stop at the stop line 305 in all instances such as if a stop sign is positioned at the intersection 110; require the AV 102 to stop at the stop line 305 in some instances such as if a traffic signal positioned at the intersection 110 has an active red light".
Without acquiescing to the Office's interpretation of Petroff in view of Claim 1, Applicant respectfully asserts that Petroff only teaches that the AV 102 stops at the stop line 305. However, Petroff is silent in regards to "a maximum velocity" of the vehicle "at which the vehicle can stop immediately before the intersection" in regard to a "right of way". Merely requiring the AV 102 to stop at the stop line 305 does not teach "a maximum velocity", and more specifically "setting a maximum velocity, as an upper limit velocity of the vehicle, at which the vehicle can stop immediately before the intersection", as recited in amended Claim 1.
Therefore, for at least these reasons, Applicant respectfully asserts that Petroff fails to disclose each and every feature of amended Claim 1. Reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.
Independent Claims 8-12
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejection of Claims 8-12 but has been amended the claims to expedite allowance. Claims 8-12 have been amended similarly as Claim 1.
Therefore, for at least the same reasons as asserted above with respect to amended Claim 1, Applicant respectfully asserts that Petroff fails to disclose each and every feature of amended Claims 8-12. Reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.
Dependent Claims 2-7
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejections but submits that each of the dependent Claims 2-7 depends directly or indirectly on independent Claim 1. Thus, dependent Claims 2-7 incorporate by reference all the features of independent Claim 1. In view of the features as recited in the independent Claim 1, and in view of the additional features as recited in the dependent claims, Applicant respectfully submits that dependent Claims 2-7 are allowable for at least the reasons discussed above and their respective additional novel features. Although Applicant has not discussed specific features of all of the dependent claims in this response, Applicant does not necessarily agree with the characterizations and assessments made by the Examiner with respect to the dependent claims. Thus, Applicant respectfully submits that dependent Claims 2-7 are allowable.
D.
New Claims 13-16
New Claims 13-16 have been added. Applicant respectfully requests favorable consideration of the claims.
Attorney Docket Number D2203.11161US01
E.
No Disclaimers or Disavowals
Although the present communication may include alterations to the application or claims, or characterizations of claim scope or referenced art, Applicant is not conceding in this application that previously pending claims are not patentable. Rather, any alterations or characterizations are being made to facilitate expeditious prosecution of this application. Applicant reserves the right to pursue at a later date any previously pending or other broader or narrower claims that capture any subject matter supported by the present disclosure, including subject matter found to be specifically disclaimed herein or by any prior prosecution. Accordingly, reviewers of this or any parent, child or related prosecution history shall not reasonably infer that Applicant has made any disclaimers or disavowals of any subject matter supported by the present application.
F.
Charge Authorization
The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge payment of any of the following fees that may be applicable to this communication, or credit any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-5394: (1) any filing fees required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.16; (2) any patent application and reexamination processing fees under 37 C.F.R. § 1.17; and/or (3) any post issuance fees under 37 C.F.R. § 1.20. In addition, if any additional extension of time is required, which has not otherwise been requested, please consider this a petition therefor and charge any additional fees that may be required to Deposit Account No. 50-5394.
Respectfully submitted,

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT
1.	An examiner’s amendment to the record appears below. Should the changes and/or additions be unacceptable to applicant, an amendment may be filed as provided by 37 CFR 1.312. To ensure consideration of such an amendment, it MUST be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee.
2.	Authorization for this examiner’s amendment was given in an interview with Andrew Lee (Reg# 62005) on February 12, 2025.
3.	The application has been amended as follows:
CLAIM 9, LINE 7: before “controlling” inserted --automatically--;
CLAIM 10, LINE 8: before “controlling” inserted --automatically--;
CLAIM 11, LINE 9: before “controlling” inserted --automatically--;
CLAIM 12, LINE 10: before “controlling” inserted --automatically--.
The above changes were made to overcome a 101 rejection to clearly distinguish over an interpretation in which a human driver of a vehicle evaluates in their mind an approaching intersection and decides how to safely proceed.
Reasons for Allowance
4.	The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 1-16 are distinguishable over the prior art insofar as the prior art of record does not disclose or reasonably suggest, in combination with the other claimed limitations, controlling the velocity of the vehicle by setting a maximum velocity, as an upper limit velocity of the vehicle, at which the vehicle can stop immediately before the intersection when the vehicle on the traveling road has no right of way.
5.	Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee.  Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
6.

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20200035102A1: Claims:
A drive assist device comprising: an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from an on-board camera; a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around a host vehicle on the basis of the captured image; a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; and an assist unit that executes, in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, drive assistance for the host vehicle when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein the road information includes a road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road.
an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from an on-board camera;
a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around a host vehicle on the basis of the captured image;
a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; and
an assist unit that executes, in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, drive assistance for the host vehicle when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein
the road information includes a road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein in at least one of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road and its surrounding place, the assist unit determines an assist area in which the assistance is provided on the basis of the road information.
in at least one of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road and its surrounding place, the assist unit determines an assist area in which the assistance is provided on the basis of the road information.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein the road information includes at least one of a type of road sign and a type of road marking.
the road information includes at least one of a type of road sign and a type of road marking.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein the road information includes the type of at least one of road sign and road marking and the road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road, if the type of at least one of road sign and road marking is recognized, the determination unit determines the priority relation on the basis of the recognized type, and if neither the type of road sign nor the type of road marking is recognized but the road form is recognized, the determination unit determines the priority relation on the basis of the road form.
the road information includes the type of at least one of road sign and road marking and the road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road,
if the type of at least one of road sign and road marking is recognized, the determination unit determines the priority relation on the basis of the recognized type, and
if neither the type of road sign nor the type of road marking is recognized but the road form is recognized, the determination unit determines the priority relation on the basis of the road form.
A drive assist device comprising: an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from an on-board camera; a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around a host vehicle on the basis of the captured image; a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; an assist unit that executes, in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, drive assistance for the host vehicle when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road; and a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road, wherein in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no running vehicle.
a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road;
an assist unit that executes, in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, drive assistance for the host vehicle when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road; and
a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road, wherein
in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no running vehicle.
A drive assist device comprising: an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from an on-board camera; a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around a host vehicle on the basis of the captured image; a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; an assist unit that executes, in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, drive assistance for the host vehicle when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road; and a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road, a position of the running vehicle, and a traveling direction of the running vehicle, wherein in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no approaching vehicle.
a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road, a position of the running vehicle, and a traveling direction of the running vehicle, wherein
in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no approaching vehicle.
The drive assist device according to claim 6 , wherein the vehicle detection unit detects a running vehicle in the intersecting road from the captured image.
the vehicle detection unit detects a running vehicle in the intersecting road from the captured image.
The drive assist device according to claim 6 , wherein the assist unit executes brake control on the basis of a probability of collision with the running vehicle detected by the vehicle detection unit.
the assist unit executes brake control on the basis of a probability of collision with the running vehicle detected by the vehicle detection unit.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , comprising: an obstacle detection unit that detects, from the captured image, presence or absence of an obstacle that hinders capture of the intersecting road, wherein in the presence of the obstacle, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in the absence of the obstacle.
an obstacle detection unit that detects, from the captured image, presence or absence of an obstacle that hinders capture of the intersecting road, wherein
in the presence of the obstacle, the assist unit executes the assistance in an area different from an area in which the assist unit executes the assistance in the absence of the obstacle.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein in accordance with a traveling direction in which the host vehicle enters the intersecting road, the assist unit determines an assist area in which the assistance is provided.
in accordance with a traveling direction in which the host vehicle enters the intersecting road, the assist unit determines an assist area in which the assistance is provided.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein the assist unit is capable of executing the assistance using a plurality of assist execution devices configured to be capable of executing the assistance in different ways, and the assist unit executes the assistance with the assist execution device of a type that depends on the road information.
the assist unit is capable of executing the assistance using a plurality of assist execution devices configured to be capable of executing the assistance in different ways, and
the assist unit executes the assistance with the assist execution device of a type that depends on the road information.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , comprising: a traffic light determination unit that determines whether there is a traffic light in the place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein in response to the traffic light determination unit determining that there is a traffic light, the assist unit restricts execution of the assistance.
a traffic light determination unit that determines whether there is a traffic light in the place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein
in response to the traffic light determination unit determining that there is a traffic light, the assist unit restricts execution of the assistance.
The drive assist device according to claim 1 , wherein the assist unit executes control of a notification device that notifies a driver of the host vehicle that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road.
the assist unit executes control of a notification device that notifies a driver of the host vehicle that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road.
The drive assist device according claim 14 , wherein the notification device is a monitor or a speaker.
the notification device is a monitor or a speaker.
A drive assist device mounted in a host vehicle including an on-board camera, a speaker, and a display device, the drive assist device comprising: an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from the on-board camera; a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around the host vehicle on the basis of the captured image; a determination unit that determines, on the basis of the road information recognized by the recognition unit, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; and an assist unit that executes predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, and does not execute the predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters the place where the present road meets the intersecting road in response to the determination unit determining that the present road has priority over the intersecting road, wherein the drive assist device is characterized by either: (1) the road information includes a road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road; or (2) a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road is further provided, and in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no running vehicle, or a position of the running vehicle in the intersecting road and a traveling direction of the running vehicle are further detected by the vehicle detection unit, and in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no approaching vehicle.
an acquisition unit that acquires a captured image from the on-board camera;
a recognition unit that recognizes road information of roads around the host vehicle on the basis of the captured image;
an assist unit that executes predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road in response to the determination unit determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, and does not execute the predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters the place where the present road meets the intersecting road in response to the determination unit determining that the present road has priority over the intersecting road, wherein
the drive assist device is characterized by either:
(1) the road information includes a road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road; or
(2) a vehicle detection unit that detects presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road is further provided, and in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no running vehicle, or a position of the running vehicle in the intersecting road and a traveling direction of the running vehicle are further detected by the vehicle detection unit, and in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no approaching vehicle.
in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no running vehicle, or
a position of the running vehicle in the intersecting road and a traveling direction of the running vehicle are further detected by the vehicle detection unit, and in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to the vehicle detection unit detecting no approaching vehicle.
A drive assist method that is applied to a host vehicle including an on-board camera, a speaker, and a display device, the drive assist method comprising: acquiring a captured image from the on-board camera;
acquiring a captured image from the on-board camera;
recognizing road information of roads around the host vehicle on the basis of the captured image; determining, on the basis of the road information, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; and in response to determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, executing predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road; and in response to determining that the present road has priority over the intersecting road, not executing the predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters the place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein the drive assist method is characterized by either: (1) the road information includes a road form of the place where the present road meets the intersecting road; or (2) presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road is detected, and in response to detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to detecting no running vehicle, or a position of the running vehicle in the intersecting road and a traveling direction of the running vehicle are further detected, and in a situation where the host vehicle is about to turn right or left to enter a lane of the intersecting road or where the host vehicle is about to cross a lane of the intersecting road, in response to detecting a running vehicle in the lane approaching the host vehicle, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assistance is executed in response to detecting no approaching vehicle.
determining, on the basis of the road information, a priority relation between a present road in which the host vehicle is running and an intersecting road that meets the present road; and
in response to determining that the present road does not have priority over the intersecting road, executing predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters a place where the present road meets the intersecting road; and
in response to determining that the present road has priority over the intersecting road, not executing the predetermined drive assistance using the speaker or the display device when the host vehicle enters the place where the present road meets the intersecting road, wherein
the drive assist method is characterized by either:
(2) presence or absence of a running vehicle in the intersecting road is detected, and in response to detecting the running vehicle in the intersecting road, the assistance is executed in an area different from an area in which the assista
[Truncated to input limit]