Office Action 2: Notice of Allowance (2025-02-26)

CLAIMS:
CLAIMS What we claim is:

1\. A method comprising:
identifying, by a processor, a maximum distance bound based on one or more objects around a vehicle;
for each of a plurality of candidate trajectories for the vehicle:
determining, by the processor, a velocity from the maximum distance bound at an ending time of the candidate trajectory;
determining, by the processor, an available distance for the candidate trajectory as a function of the determined velocity at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and a comfort deceleration parameter;
determining, by the processor, a target velocity for the candidate trajectory as a function of the available distance for the candidate trajectory, a difference between a distance at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and a distance of the maximum distance bound at the ending time of the candidate trajectory, and the comfort deceleration parameter; and
determining, by the processor, a velocity difference between the target velocity and a final velocity of the candidate trajectory at the ending time of the candidate trajectory;
selecting, by the processor, a first candidate trajectory of the plurality of candidate trajectories based on the velocity difference of the first candidate trajectory and the velocity differences of the other candidate trajectories of the plurality of candidate trajectories; and
operating, by the processor, the vehicle based on the selected first candidate trajectory.

2\. The method of claim 1, further comprising identifying, by the processor, the one or more objects around the vehicle;
generating, by the processor, one or more maximum distance bounds based on the one or more identified objects; and
consolidating the one or more generated maximum distance bounds into the maximum distance bound.

3\. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the one or more objects comprises identifying, by the processor, one or more static or dynamic objects from images or LiDAR.

4\. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the velocity difference between the target velocity and the final velocity of the candidate trajectory at the ending time comprises:
comparing, by the processor, the target velocity with the determined velocity for the ending time of the candidate trajectory; and
selecting, by the processor, the target velocity responsive to determining the target velocity is lower than the determined velocity for the ending time of the candidate trajectory.

5\. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of candidate trajectories comprise minimum jerk trajectories.

6\. The method of claim 1, wherein identifying the one or more objects comprises identifying, by the processor, the one or more objects using one or more of camera system data, LiDAR system data, GNSS data, or IMU system data.

7\. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the target velocity comprises:
determining, by the processor, a total distance as a sum of the available distance for the candidate trajectory and the difference between the distance at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and the distance of the maximum distance bound at the ending time of the candidate trajectory; and
determining, by the processor, the target velocity as a function of the total distance and the comfort deceleration parameter.

8\. The method of claim 7, wherein the comfort deceleration parameter is a first deceleration parameter, and wherein determining the target velocity comprises:
determining, by the processor, a first target velocity as a function of the total distance and the comfort deceleration parameter, and, separately, a second target velocity using a ramp function on the total distance.

9\. The method of claim 8, wherein the determining the target velocity for the candidate trajectory comprises:
selecting, by the processor, the first target velocity as the target velocity for the candidate trajectory responsive to determining the first target velocity is lower than the second target velocity.

10\. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of candidate trajectories corresponds to a distance of the vehicle compared to an initial position of the vehicle when performing the method over time.

11\. The method of claim 1, comprising:
retrieving, by the processor, the plurality of candidate trajectories from memory by sampling, by the processor, trajectory velocities and durations for a defined range and step of time.

12\. A system comprising:
memory; and
one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
identify a maximum distance bound based on one or more objects around a vehicle;
for each of a plurality of candidate trajectories for the vehicle:
determining a velocity from the maximum distance bound at an ending time of the candidate trajectory;
determining an available distance for the candidate trajectory as a function of the determined velocity at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and a comfort deceleration parameter;
determining a target velocity for the candidate trajectory as a function of the available distance for the candidate trajectory, a difference between a distance at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and a distance of the maximum distance bound at the ending time of the candidate trajectory, and the comfort deceleration parameter; and
determining a velocity difference between the target velocity and a final velocity of the candidate trajectory at the ending time of the candidate trajectory; selecting a first candidate trajectory of the plurality of candidate trajectories based on the velocity difference of the first candidate trajectory and the velocity differences of the other candidate trajectories of the plurality of candidate trajectories; and
operating the vehicle based on the selected first candidate trajectory.

13\. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
identify the one or more objects around the vehicle;
generate one or more maximum distance bounds based on the one or more identified objects; and
consolidate the one or more generated maximum distance bounds into the maximum distance bound.

14\. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are configured to identify the one or more objects by identifying one or more static or dynamic objects from images or LiDAR.

15\. The system of claim 12, wherein each of the plurality of candidate trajectories corresponds to a distance of the vehicle compared to an initial position of the vehicle over time.

16\. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
retrieve the plurality of candidate trajectories from memory by sampling trajectory velocities and durations for a defined range and step of time.

17\. The system of claim 12, wherein the plurality of candidate trajectories comprise minimum jerk trajectories.

18\. A method comprising:
identifying, by a processor, a maximum distance bound based on one or more objects around a vehicle;
for each of a plurality of candidate trajectories for the vehicle:
determining, by the processor, a velocity from the maximum distance bound at an ending time of the candidate trajectory; determining, by the processor, a target velocity for the candidate trajectory based on the determined velocity for the candidate trajectory and a difference between a distance at the ending time of the candidate trajectory and a distance of the maximum distance bound at the ending time of the candidate trajectory; and
determining, by the processor, a velocity difference between the target velocity and a final velocity of the candidate trajectory at the ending time of the candidate trajectory;
selecting, by the processor, a first candidate trajectory of the plurality of candidate trajectories based on the velocity difference of the first candidate trajectory and the velocity differences of the other candidate trajectories of the plurality of candidate trajectories; and
operating, by the processor, the vehicle based on the selected first candidate trajectory.

19\. The method of claim 18, further comprising identifying, by the processor, the one or more objects around the vehicle;
generating, by the processor, one or more maximum distance bounds based on the one or more identified objects; and
consolidating the one or more generated maximum distance bounds into the maximum distance bound.

20\. The method of claim 18, wherein identifying the one or more objects comprises identifying, by the processor, one or more static or dynamic objects from images or LiDAR. 29 30 31 32 33 4889-9567-9311.1

OFFICE ACTION:
NOTICE OF ALLOWABILITY
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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: No applicable prior art was found.  In particular, the following was not found:  the consolidation of maximum distance/velocity bounds in one general maximum distance/velocity bound, then used to compare with a set of trajectories such that the final distance and velocity of a picked trajectory remained within bounds, with the further constraint that the vehicle is able to comfortably come to a stop from the final velocity. (This is the same explanation as was provided in the Quayle Action mailed 12/19/2024.)
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.”
Conclusion

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: PATENT
REMARKS
The Ex Parte Quayle Action dated December 19, 2024, has been carefully reviewed, and the forgoing amendment and the following remarks have been made in consequence thereof.
Examiner Interview Summary
Applicant thanks Examiner Sienko for the interview conducted on January 28, 2025. During the interview, Specification objection 13 stated on page 4 of the Ex Parte Quayle Action was discussed. An agreement was reached that "available distance" is a general term of distance that is available under different conditions or scenarios. Examiner Sienko indicated that the language at paragraph [0068] may remain as it is and no further action is necessary.
Drawing Objections
Three Replacement Sheets are submitted herewith for original FIGS. 2, 6, and 7A. The Replacement sheets comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) and include reference sign(s) mentioned in the description. Applicant respectfully submits that no new matter is added by any of these amendments.
The Office asserts that the drawings are objected to "because in Fig. 2, 'Object Node' is referred to by 114 (which is found in Fig. 1 labeling 'Object Node'), while in Fig. 2, 'Map Node' is referred to by 204 (different from the label found in Fig. 1, where 'Mapping Node' is labeled with 116)." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 2. Applicant has amended FIG. 2 to depict "Mapping Node" for label 204 and replaced the 114 label for "Object Node" with a 202 label.
The Office has also objected to the drawings for failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description.
"Fig 2.: the description in [0041] mentions 'an object node 202' and 202 is missing from Fig. 2." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 2. As previously discussed, Applicant has amended FIG.
2 to replace the 114 label with a 202 label.
PATENT
"Fig. 6: 612 and 614 are missing and [0057] mentions 'a trajectory distance 612' and 'a specific duration or ('time' 614)"'. Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 2. Applicant has amended FIG. 6 to include labels 612 and 614 for "a trajectory distance" and "a specific duration or time" respectively.
"Fig. 7A: does not show what its description in [0061] states." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 2. Applicant has amended FIG. 7A to show what its description in [0061] states.
Sp
ecification Ob
j
ections
The Office has objected to the disclosure because of the following informalities:
"[0041]: as mentioned above, 202 as a label is missing from Fig. 2, where the object node is labelled 114." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 3. As previously discussed, Applicant has amended FIG. 2 to replace the 114 label with a 202 label.
'
...consuming
one or more distance and/or velocity bounds.' Is this really the word wanted here." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 3. Applicant has amended [0049] to recite "generating" instead of "consuming".
"[0061]: The situation shown in Fig. 7A does not show what is described here." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 3. As previously discussed, Applicant has amended FIG. 7A to show what its description in [0061] states.
"[0066]: 'position bound(trajectory end time) can be the position or distance of the maximum distance bound at the end of the candidate trajectory...' should probably be restated as 'position bound(trajectory end time) can be the position or distance of the maximum distance bound at the end time of the candidate trajectory... "' Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 3. Applicant has amended [0066] according to the Office's suggestion.
"[0066]: 'trajectory end position(trajectory end time) can be the position or distance of the vehicle relative to the initial position of the vehicle at the end of the candidate trajectory...' is confusing because 'initial position of the vehicle at the end of the candidate trajectory' makes no
PATENT
sense." Ex Parte Quayle at pages 3-4. The Office then asserts "if this phrase has been interpreted correctly, it would be better stated as: 'trajectory end position(trajectory end time) can be the position or distance of the vehicle at the end of the candidate trajectory, relative to the initial position of the vehicle..."' Ex Parte Quayle Action at pages 3 and 4. Applicant has further amended [0066] according to the Office's suggestion.
"[0066]: 'the comfort deceleration parameter can be a or a defined value'; it looks like there is a word missing." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 4. Applicant has further amended [0066] to recite "the comfort deceleration parameter can be a defined value".
"[0068]: 'Using the slope of the maximum distance bound and transforming the slope into an available distance...' would seem to have a different interpretation of 'available distance' than what is found in earlier paragraphs." Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 4. As previously discussed, "available distance" is a general term of distance that is available under different conditions or scenarios. As agreed during the examiner interview, the language in this paragraph may remain as it is and no further action is necessary
"[0072]: the second instance of 'At step 812...' should be 'At step 814..."' Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 4. Applicant has amended [0072] according to the Office's suggestion.
"[0073]: The two mentions of 'candidate trajectory' in the line 2 should probably be 'candidate trajectories."' Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 4. Applicant has amended [0073] according to the Office's suggestion.
"[0073]: '...at step 814,...' should be '...at step 816,..."' Ex Parte Quayle Action at page
4. Applicant has amended [0073] according to the Office's suggestion.
"[0073]: 'At step 816, the data processing system...' should be 'At step 818, the data processing system... "' Ex Parte Quayle Action at page 4. Applicant has further amended [0073] according to the Office's suggestion.
PATENT
CONCLUSION