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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant submitted amendments and remarks on October 31, 2025. Therein, Applicant submitted substantive arguments. Claims 1, 6, and 12 have been amended. No claims were added. Claim 11 was cancelled.
The submitted claims are considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 6, 8, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bostick, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170291493) in view of Trinh (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170132467) and further in view of Morris, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150241961).
Regarding claim 1, Bostick, et al. teaches: An apparatus for providing information on board a vehicle, comprising: a first display; (Paragraph [0021]: "…dashboard (114) may be a digital display where the controls displayed on dashboard (114) are determined via software [first display].")
a second display; (Paragraph [0025]: "Flexible display (118) in contained in steering wheel (116) and is used to display one or more obstructed displays (e.g., the speedometer, fuel gauge, information center, etc.) to the user on steering wheel (116) [second display].")
a scanning device configured to capture a scan of an interior of the vehicle including a position of a person on board the vehicle; (Paragraph [0021]: "…cameras (110) [scanning device] may be evenly spaced around steering wheel (116) in view of dashboard (114) to provide a continuous view of dashboard (114) as steering wheel (116) is turned by a user, also referred to as a driver, of vehicle (102) [capture scan of interior of vehicle including position of person on board vehicle].")
a processor configured to: determine, based on the scan capture by the scanning device, a constellation in which the second display is located between the first display and the person; (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0025]: "Flexible display (118) in contained in steering wheel (116) and is used to display one or more obstructed displays (e.g., the speedometer, fuel gauge, information center, etc.) to the user on steering wheel (116) [constellation - second display is located between first display and person].")
determine, based on the constellation, a display content of the first display that is covered by the second display; (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0025]: "Flexible display (118) in contained in steering wheel (116) and is used to display one or more obstructed displays (e.g., the speedometer, fuel gauge, information center, etc.) to the user on steering wheel (116) [determine display content on first display that is covered by second display].")
and provide on the second display the display content of the first display that is determined based on the constellation to be covered by the second display (Fig. 2, Paragraph [0025]: "Flexible display (118) in contained in steering wheel (116) and is used to display one or more obstructed displays (e.g., the speedometer, fuel gauge, information center, etc.) to the user on steering wheel (116) [provide display content on second display determined by constellation to be covered by second display]. In one example embodiment, flexible display (118) may be comprised of one or more flexible displays (118) and a plurality of manual, or non-digital, controls that allows a user of vehicle (102) to activate or deactivate features within vehicle (102) [example].").
Bostick, et al. does not teach wherein determining the constellation comprises determining a position of a head of the person in multiple directions.
In a similar field of endeavor (vehicle person identification), Trinh teaches: wherein determining the constellation comprises determining a position of a head of the person in multiple directions (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0008]: "…personal identification, which likewise may be used, for example, in a vehicle as driving authorization control […] the viewing direction of the person is determined with the aid of a viewing-direction recognition unit, and subsequently, in a second step, based on the recognized viewing direction, a search window is determined, within which a camera-based personal identification is carried out [vehicle identifying person in vehicle]." ; Paragraph [0013]: "…use at least two viewing-direction recognition units, making it possible to detect the head of the person from different directions. Correspondingly, the eye position or the viewing direction may also be detected in the case of different head positions. The use of several viewing-direction recognition units provides greater certainty and reliability in the personal identification [determining position of head of person in multiple directions].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bostick, et al. to include the teaching of Trinh based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the identification of a person’s head within a vehicle from multiple points of view (Trinh Paragraph [0013]).
The combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh does not teach wherein the covered display content comprises multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities; and wherein only objects whose priority is greater than a priority of a display content of the second display are provided on the second display.
In a similar field of endeavor (adjusting a display based on a specific orientation), Morris, et al. teaches: wherein the covered display content comprises multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities; (Paragraph [0034]: "…information to be displayed [covered display content] is of a priority high enough to display […] The priority associated with each information type [multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities] may be predefined by an implementer of system (200).")
and wherein only objects whose priority is greater than a priority of a display content of the second display are provided on the second display (Paragraph [0047]: "…determine if the priority is above a predetermined threshold, and thus, displayed [decision - only objects greater than priority of display content are displayed] via the selected display [second display] in operation (330).").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh to include the teaching of Morris, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of adjusting a display based on a detected orientation as a function of data from an information input module and a display selector (Morris, et al. Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 4, Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, in a further embodiment, teach: The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the scanning device comprises an interior camera of the vehicle (Bostick, et al. Paragraph [0021]: "…cameras (110) [interior camera] may be evenly spaced around steering wheel (116) in view of dashboard (114) to provide a continuous view of dashboard (114) as steering wheel (116) is turned by a user, also referred to as a driver, of vehicle (102) [vehicle].").
Regarding claim 5, Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, in a further embodiment, teach: A vehicle comprising an apparatus according to claim 1 (Bostick, et al. Paragraph [0021]: "…cameras (110) may be evenly spaced around steering wheel (116) in view of dashboard (114) to provide a continuous view of dashboard (114) as steering wheel (116) [apparatus] is turned by a user, also referred to as a driver, of vehicle (102) [vehicle].").
Regarding claim 6, Bostick, et al. teaches: A method for providing information on board a vehicle via a first and a second display, the method comprising: determining, with a processor, based on a scan of a position of a person captured by a scanning device, a constellation in which the second display is located between the person on board the vehicle and the first display; (Step (312), Paragraph [0037]: "In step (312), display software (122) [processor] calculates and displays the controls that are obstructed from the user's viewing angle on flexible display (118) of steering wheel (116) [scan of position captured by scanning device]. For example, display software (122) will calculate the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls that are obstructed from the user's current viewing angle and displays the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls on flexible display (118) [constellation in which second display is between person and first display].")
determining with the processor, based on the determined constellation, a display content of the first display that is covered by the second display; (Step (312), Paragraph [0037]: "In step (312), display software (122) [processor] calculates and displays the controls that are obstructed from the user's viewing angle on flexible display (118) of steering wheel (116). For example, display software (122) will calculate the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls that are obstructed from the user's current viewing angle and displays the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls on flexible display (118) [determines display content of first display that is covered by second display].")
and providing on the second display, with the processor, the display content of the first display that is determined based on the constellation to be covered by the second display (Step (312), Paragraph [0037]: "In step (312), display software (122) [processor] calculates and displays the controls that are obstructed from the user's viewing angle on flexible display (118) of steering wheel (116) [provides on second display content of first display based on constellation to be covered by second display]. For example, display software (122) will calculate the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls that are obstructed from the user's current viewing angle and displays the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls on flexible display (118) [example].").
Bostick, et al. does not teach wherein determining the constellation comprises determining a position of a head of the person in multiple directions.
In a similar field of endeavor (vehicle person identification), Trinh teaches: wherein determining the constellation comprises determining a position of a head of the person in multiple directions (Fig. 1, Paragraph [0008]: "…personal identification, which likewise may be used, for example, in a vehicle as driving authorization control […] the viewing direction of the person is determined with the aid of a viewing-direction recognition unit, and subsequently, in a second step, based on the recognized viewing direction, a search window is determined, within which a camera-based personal identification is carried out [vehicle identifying person in vehicle]." ; Paragraph [0013]: "…use at least two viewing-direction recognition units, making it possible to detect the head of the person from different directions. Correspondingly, the eye position or the viewing direction may also be detected in the case of different head positions. The use of several viewing-direction recognition units provides greater certainty and reliability in the personal identification [determining position of head of person in multiple directions].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bostick, et al. to include the teaching of Trinh based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the identification of a person’s head within a vehicle from multiple points of view (Trinh Paragraph [0013]).
The combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh does not teach wherein: the covered display content comprises multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities; and wherein only objects whose priority is greater than a priority of a display content of the second display are provided on the second display.
In a similar field of endeavor (adjusting a display based on a specific orientation), Morris, et al. teaches: wherein: the covered display content comprises multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities, (Paragraph [0034]: "…information to be displayed [covered display content] is of a priority high enough to display […] The priority associated with each information type [multiple objects with respectively assigned priorities] may be predefined by an implementer of system (200).")
and only objects whose priority is greater than a priority of a display content of the second display are provided on the second display (Paragraph [0047]: "…determine if the priority is above a predetermined threshold, and thus, displayed [decision - only objects greater than priority of display content are displayed] via the selected display [second display] in operation (330).").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh to include the teaching of Morris, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of adjusting a display based on a detected orientation as a function of data from an information input module and a display selector (Morris, et al. Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 8, Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. remain as applied to claim 6, in a further embodiment, teach: The method according to claim 6, wherein determining the constellation comprises determining, with the processor, a position of an eye of the person on board the vehicle (Bostick, et al. Step (306), Paragraph [0034]: "Display software (122) uses overhead cameras and micro cameras in steering wheel (116) to detect the user' s eye position to determine the obstruction of specific controls based on the position of user as depicted in step (306) [determining constellation - position of eye in vehicle].").
Regarding claim 10, Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. remain as applied to claim 6, in a further embodiment, teach: The method according to claim 6, wherein: a determined display content is provided on the second display only when a priority of the determined display content is greater than a priority of a display content of the second display (Morris, et al. Paragraph [0045]: "…onto one of the displays associated with method (300) [second display] is received. The information may include a priority or other augmented information to ascertain the informations criticality or priority of display [only when priority of determined display content is greater than display content]").
Regarding claim 12, Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. remain as applied to claim 6, in a further embodiment, teach: The method according to claim 6, wherein an object of the first display is overlaid on a display content of the second display (Bostick, et al. Step (312), Paragraph [0037]: "…step (312), display software (122) calculates and displays the controls that are obstructed from the user' s viewing angle on flexible display (118) of steering wheel (116). For example, display software (122) will calculate the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls that are obstructed from the user' s current viewing angle and displays the blocked instruments, gauges, and controls on flexible display (118) [objects of first display are displayed on second display].").
Claims 2, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bostick, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170291493), Trinh (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170132467), and Morris, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150241961) in view of Kim (U.S. Patent No. 11562579).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. does not teach the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the first display is movably attached in the vehicle, and the apparatus further comprises a determining device configured to determine a position of the second display.
In a similar field of endeavor (vehicle display control based on position of passengers), Kim teaches: The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the first display is movably attached in the vehicle, (Col. 18, lines 62-66: "…processor (470) may adjust the position and direction of the first display [moveably attached in vehicle] […] processor (470) may raise the height of the first display when the backrest of the seat is tilted [example].")
and the apparatus further comprises a determining device configured to determine a position of the second display (Col. 20, lines 20-25: "…processor (270) may move the display region set on the second display up or down (S2030) [device (processor) determines position of second display].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. to include the teaching of Kim based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the position of a vehicle control display based on the characteristics of the vehicle’s passengers (Kim Col. 1, lines 55-65).
Regarding claim 7, The combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein determining the constellation comprises determining, with the processor, a position of the head of the person on board the vehicle.
In a similar field of endeavor (vehicle display control based on position of passengers), Kim teaches: The method according to claim 6, wherein determining the constellation comprises determining, with the processor, a position of the head of the person on board the vehicle (Step (S1420), Col. 17, lines 34-35: "…face [person on board the vehicle] height from the floor surface of the vehicle (700) (S1420) [determining position of head].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh to include the teaching of Kim based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the position of a vehicle control display based on the characteristics of the vehicle’s passengers (Kim Col. 1, lines 55-65).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein determining the constellation comprises determining, with the processor, a pose of the second display.
In a similar field of endeavor (vehicle display control based on position of passengers), Kim teaches: The method according to claim 6, wherein determining the constellation comprises determining, with the processor, a pose of the second display (Step (S2030), Col. 20, lines 20-22: "…processor (270) may move the display region set on the second display up or down (S2030) [determining pose of second display].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al. and Trinh to include the teaching of Kim based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the position of a vehicle control display based on the characteristics of the vehicle’s passengers (Kim Col. 1, lines 55-65).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bostick, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170291493), Trinh (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170132467), Morris, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150241961) and Kim (U.S. Patent No. 11562579) and further in view of Osornio Lopez, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9096129).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, Morris, et al., and Kim teaches: The apparatus according to claim 2, wherein: and the determining device comprises a sensor for determining a steering wheel angle (Kim Col. 7, lines 30-39: "…sensing unit (760) [sensor] […] steering wheel rotation angle information [determining steering wheel angle].").
The combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, Morris, et al., and Kim does not teach wherein the second display is attached to a rotatable steering wheel of the vehicle.
In a similar field of endeavor (facilitating viewing of information in vehicles), Osornio Lopez, et al. teaches: wherein the second display is attached to a rotatable steering wheel of the vehicle (Fig. 7, Col. 22, lines 28-32: "In the present example embodiment shown in FIG.3, the display regions (300) include a first display region (310) forward of the steering wheel (130) that is visible through the steering wheel (by way of an orifice formed within the steering wheel) [display attached to steering wheel]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, Morris, et al., and Kim to include the teaching of Osornio Lopez, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of displaying information for viewing in a vehicle (Osornio Lopez, et al. Col. 2, lines 16-20).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on October 31, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserted that amended claims 1 and 6 were patentable over Bostick, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170291493) in view of Trinh (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170132467) because the references did not meet the concepts of displayed content comprising multiple objects with respective priorities, and that only objects who priority is greater than a priority of a display content of a display are provided on the display. Please note that Morris, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150241961) was cited in order to teach these features. In Morris, et al., the usage of the information input module (220) enables the use of a lookup table containing multiple pieces of information which is sorted based on priority and in which a judgement is made whether the information “…is of a priority high enough to display” and “…may record whether certain information is to be displayed at a higher priority than other information” (Paragraph [0034]). Additionally, as described in operation (340), the priority information is analyzed on the second display in a process which “…determine if the priority is above a predetermined threshold, and thus”, only the selected prioritized information is displayed “…via the selected display” (Paragraph [0047]). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Morris, et al. with Bostick, et al. and Trinh because Bostick, et al. teaches a scanning device configured to scan the interior of a vehicle and determine the position of a person within the vehicle (Paragraph [0021]) and Trinh teaches the process of creating a constellation by determining a position of a head of a person in multiple directions (Fig. 1, Paragraphs [0008], [0013]).
Therefore, it can be concluded that since the combination of Bostick, et al., Trinh, and Morris, et al. reads on the concepts of displayed content comprising multiple objects with respective priorities, and that only objects who priority is greater than a priority of a display content of a display are provided on the display, as stated in amended claims 1 and 6, the arguments presented by the Applicant are not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Edgren (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20140191940) describes a display arrangement for a vehicle which includes a display (or multiple displays) for displaying information to a vehicle operator and a sensor (or multiple sensors) for monitoring a head position of the vehicle operator and generating input signals as a function of the head position of the vehicle operator.
Singh, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10691391) describes a display control apparatus (and associated method) for dynamically controlling the display of information in a vehicle.
Applicant is considered to have implicit knowledge of the entire disclosure once a reference has been cited. Therefore, any previously cited figures, columns and lines should not be considered to limit the references in any way. The entire reference must be taken as a whole; accordingly, the Examiner contends that the art supports the rejection of the claims and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TORRENCE S MARUNDA II whose telephone number is (571)272-5172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:30.
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, ANGELA Y ORTIZ can be reached on 571-272-1206. 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.
/TORRENCE S MARUNDA II/ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663