DETAILED ACTION
This final action is in reply the response filed 17 February 2026, which was in reply to the non-final action, date 17 November 2025.
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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 36-41, 43, 44 and 46-54 are pending. Claims 36, 37, and 46 have been amended and claim 45 has been canceled.
Applicant’s amendments necessitated additional claim objections, for claims 36-39, 41, 46, 51, and 54 as discussed below.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claims 36 and 37 (pgs. 3-9, Action) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 38-41, 43, 44 and 46-54 (pgs. 9-36, Action), applicant’s amendments have necessitated additional searching and consideration of new grounds of rejection. Accordingly the new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are claims 36 and 37 by Yagyu II and Ko; claims 38, 39 and 50 in view of Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata; claim 40 in view of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade; claim 41 in view of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung, Zawade and Horihata; claim 43 in view of Yagyu II and Chandupatta; claims 44, 46, 47, 49, 51 and 54 in view of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu; claim 48 in view of Yagyu II, Ko, Ogisu and Yagyu; claim 52 in view of Yagyu II, Ko, Horihata, Ogisu, Kimishima; and claim 53 in view of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung, Kimishima, as discussed below. Since claim 45 has been canceled the rejection of that claim under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been rendered moot.
Claim Objections
Claims 36-39, 41, 46, 51, and 54 are objected to because of the following informality.
Claim 36, as amended, recites output “the static carpet image”, and display “the static carpet image”. This limitation lacks antecedent basis. Examiner believe that this is a typographical error, based on the previously recited “a carpet” image. In view of compact prosecution the examiner interprets “the static carpet image” and “the carpet image.”
Claims 37, 38, 39, 41 and 46, dependent directly or indirectly upon claim 36, also recite “the static carpet image”.
Claim 51, dependent upon 36, recites outputs “a static carpet image”. It is unclear whether this is the same or different from “a static carpet image” recited in the previous limitation.
Claim 54 currently depends upon canceled claim 45. In view of compact prosecution the examiner is interpreting this claim as dependent upon claim 36.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
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 36 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0172652 to Yagyu et al. (hereafter Yagyu II) and U.S. Patent Publication Number 2015/0363934 to Ko.
As per claim 36, Yagyu II discloses [a] route guidance device (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract) comprising:
a communication unit configured to receive a first image photographed by a camera (see at least Yagyu II, [0048] disclosing that the periphery monitoring sensor 30 provides detection information of detecting an object around the vehicle A to the driving assistance ECU 50 and the like via the communication bus 99; [0049] disclosing that the periphery monitoring sensor 30 includes a front camera 31, a millimeter wave radar 32, and the like as detection configurations for object detection. The front camera 31 outputs at least one of image data obtained by photographing the front range of the vehicle A and an analysis result of the image data, as detection information);
and a processor (see at least Yagyu II, [0054] disclosing that The driving assistance ECU 50 mainly includes a computer equipped with a processor, RAM, a storage unit, an input/output interface, a bus connecting these elements ... The driving assistance ECU 50 has a travel environment recognition unit 51, a lane keeping control unit 52, and a lane change control unit 53 as functional units for driving assistance by executing programs by a processor; [0055] disclosing that the travel environment recognition unit 51 recognizes a traveling environment around the vehicle A based on the detection information acquired from the periphery monitoring sensor 30)
configured to perform calibration on the first image (see at least Yagyu II, [0061]; [0087] disclosing that display generation unit 76 controls the presentation of information by the meter display 23 and the HUD 20 to the driver by generating video data sequentially output to the meter display 23 and the HUD 20. The display generation unit 76 draws an original image of each content displayed as a virtual image Vi on each frame image of the video data to be output toward the HUD 20. When drawing the original image of the superimposition content CTs (see FIG. 5 and the like) on the frame image, the display generation unit 76 corrects the drawing position and drawing shape of the original image in the frame image according to the eye point EP <interpreted as calibration on the first image> and the superimposition target. As a result, the superimposition content CTs is displayed at the position and shape correctly superimposed on the superimposition target when viewed from the eye point EP; [0089]; [0093]),
output different augmented reality objects that guide driving of a vehicle based on satisfaction of a preset condition (see at least Yagyu II, [0093] disclosing that A route guidance icon CTng (see FIGS. 5 and 11) is a non-superimposition content CTn and is used for the route guidance in the guidance area GA, in the similar manner to the route guidance content CTsg. The route guidance icon CTng has a predetermined shape and is displayed at a position within a predetermined angle of view VA. As an example, the route guidance icon CTng is displayed as animation display in which a plurality of triangular shapes fly in the traveling direction of the vehicle A. The route guidance icon CTng may be displayed together with the route guidance content CTsg (see FIG. 12), or may be displayed exclusively with the route guidance content CTsg (see FIG. 11)), and
overlap a second image on which the calibration was performed (see at least Yagyu II, [0093]), and
wherein the processor comprises: an AR adapter configured to convert information received from a navigation application or a navigation system equipped in the vehicle and required for guiding a route into information required for implementing augmented reality (see at least Yagyu II, Fig. 5, [0078] disclosing that the HUD 20 displays a superimposition content CTs (see FIG. 5 and the like) and a non-superimposition content CTn (see FIG. 5 and the like) as virtual images Vi. The superimposition content CTs is an AR display object used for augmented reality (hereinafter referred to as “AR”) display. The display position of the superimposition content CTs is associated with a specific superimposition target existing in the foreground, such as a specific position on the road surface, a vehicle in front, a pedestrian, and a road sign ... . And, disclosing that the shape of the superimposition content CTs is continuously updated at a predetermined cycle according to the relative position and shape of the superimposition target. The superimposition content CTs is displayed in a posture closer to horizontal than the non-superimposition content CTn, and have, for example, a display shape extended in the depth direction as seen from the driver; [0083] disclosing that the navigation information acquisition unit 72 acquires navigation information from the navigation device 55 and provides the acquired navigation information to the display generation unit 76; Fig. 12; [0093]); and
an AR engine configured to implement route guidance in augmented reality in an image photographed through the camera using the information converted by the AR adapter (see at least Yagyu II, [0048]; [0049]; [0087] disclosing that the display generation unit 76 controls the presentation of information by the meter display 23 and the HUD 20 to the driver by generating video data sequentially output to the meter display 23 and the HUD 20. The display generation unit 76 draws an original image of each content displayed as a virtual image Vi on each frame image of the video data to be output toward the HUD 20. When drawing the original image of the superimposition content CTs (see FIG. 5 and the like) on the frame image, the display generation unit 76 corrects the drawing position and drawing shape of the original image in the frame image according to the eye point EP and the superimposition target; [0088] disclosing that the display generation unit 76 repeats a simulation operation for determining the image formation shape of the virtual image Vi on the image plane IS in order to make the superimposition content CTs follow the superimposition target. The display generation unit 76 reproduces the current traveling environment of the vehicle A in the virtual space based on the navigation information, the locator information, the map data ; [0093] );
wherein the processor is further configured to determine whether to output, based on the information acquired from the AR adapter, a carpet image guiding a direction in which the vehicle should travel at a current location (see at least Yagyu II, Fig. 5 [0078]; [0098]-[0105] <discussing a route guidance scene at an intersection>; Fig. 12), and to
output the static carpet image overlapping the second image based on the determination (see at least Yagyu II, Fig. 5; Fig. 12) ... . However, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and the claimed invention is that Yagyu II does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught by a comparable device in Ho, where it would be known to add:
display the static carpet image to overlap a lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling and a wall image perpendicular to a driving surface and guiding the vehicle's driving direction in a lane adjacent to the lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling (see at least Ko, Fig. 16; [0200] disclosing that FIG. 16 is a view illustrating a route guide screen according to an embodiment of the present invention. Referring to FIG. 16, the electronic apparatus 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention may display together the route screen guide screen (left screen) on the AR and the route guide screen (right screen) on the map ; [0201] disclosing that as illustrated in FIG. 16, the AR provision unit 160 may generate a route guide indicator 1601, a lane change guide indicator 1602, and a line departure guide indicator 1603. In addition, the AR provision unit 160 may output the generated indicators on the AR; [0202] disclosing that as an example, as illustrated in FIG. 16, the AR provision unit 160 may generate a route guide indicator 1601, a lane change guide indicator 1602, and a line departure guide indicator 1603. In addition, the AR provision unit 160 may output the generated indicators on the AR).
Yagyu II and Ko are analogous are to claim 36 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, to display the static carpet image to overlap a lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling and a wall image perpendicular to a driving surface and guiding the vehicle's driving direction in a lane adjacent to the lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling, as disclosed in Ho, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 37, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. Yagyu II further discloses the following limitations:
when a viewing angle of the second image has changed, the processor displays the static carpet image to match the lane based on the second image whose viewing angle has been changed (see at least Yagyu II, [0077] disclosing that the HUD 20 is provided with an angle of view VA. When a virtual range in the space where the virtual image VI can be imaged by the HUD 20 is defined as an imaging plane IS, the angle of view VA is defined as a viewing angle defined based on a virtual line connecting the driver's eye point EP and an outer edge of the image plane IS. The angle of view VA is a range of angle within which the driver can visually recognize the virtual image Vi when viewed from the eye point EP. ; [0200] disclosing with regard to Fig. 25, in a case where the intersection GAi is outside the angle of view VA until just before reaching the intersection GAi due to the road shape and slope of the guidance area GA, the mode of the route guidance content CTsg is changed. As an example, the HCU 100 causes to display the approach portion CTg1 as the superimposition content CTs, while causing to display the position portion CTg2 and the exit direction portion CTg3 as the non-superimposition content CTn. The approach portion CTg1 has a strip-like extending shape attached to the road surface, similar to the route guidance content CTsg (see FIG. 5) of the embodiment described above. On the other hand, the position portion CTg2 and the exit direction portion CTg3 are displayed at one of the four corners of the angle of view VA having a horizontally long rectangular shape, the one being closest to the intersection GAi), and
wherein the static carpet image does not use lane recognition results and is displayed to be bent based on inertia of the vehicle (see at least Yagyu II, Fig. 5, showing the route guidance icon, CTng, bent in the direction of movement;[0078]; [0091]; [0093]; [0098]-[0105]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to when a viewing angle of the second image has changed, displaying the static carpet image to match the lane based on the second image whose viewing angle has been changed, and having the static carpet image that does not use lane recognition results and is displayed to be bent based on inertia of the vehicle, as further disclosed in Yagyu II, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 38, 39 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II and Ko as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0223058 to Horihata et al. (hereafter Horihata).
As per claim 38, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. However, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitation taught by a comparable device in Horihata, where it would be known to add:
wherein the AR adapter determines whether a road on which the vehicle is driving is a curve, and based on the road not being a curve determine a change in altitude over a past predetermined distance, and based on the change in altitude over the past predetermined distance being greater than a preset distance (see at least Horihata, Fig. 7, [0069] disclosing that the AR guide image Gil is to be displayed based on the navigation map data, the AR guide image Gil may be displayed as if the image Gil floats on the road surface as shown in the modified example shown in FIG. 7, or the image Gli may be displayed as if the image Gil is embedded in the road surface. Such a shift in the superposed position means that the navigation map data has a particularly low accuracy of height information as compared with the high-precision map data, or the navigation map data does not have height information so that the guide image Gil cannot be generated by reflecting the slope shape of the road.; [0113]; Fig. 8, [0059] disclosing that the map determination unit 202 determines whether or not the entire range of the future travel section GS as shown in FIG. 8 is included in the high-precision map data. FIG. 8 shows a situation in which vehicle A tries to enter a general road from a highway through a ramp way. In FIG. 8, it is assumed that the vehicle A turns left at the intersection CP where the ramp way and the general road are connected.; [0060]; Fig 9, [0077] disclosing that in step S10, it is determined whether or not to start the route guidance display. For example, in step S10, it is determined that the route guidance display is started when the distance between the guidance point and the vehicle A is less than the threshold value (for example, 300 meters). When it is determined that the route guidance display is to be started, the process proceeds to step S20, and the vehicle position information is acquired from the locator 3),
request the AR engine to output the static carpet image for a predetermined period of time (see at least Horihata, Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig. 9, showing output ).
Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata are analogous are to claim 38 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Horihata relates to a display control device for displaying a virtual image (see at least Horihata, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to determine whether a road on which the vehicle is driving is a curve, and based on the road not being a curve determine a change in altitude over a past predetermined distance, and based on the change in altitude over the past predetermined distance being greater than a preset distance and request the AR engine to output the static carpet image for a predetermined period of time, as disclosed in Horihata, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 39, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata discloses all of the limitations of claim 39, as shown above. Horihata further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the AR adapter, based on the altitude change over the past predetermined distance being less than the preset distance (see at least Horihata, Fig. 8, [0059]),
requests the AR engine to output either the static carpet image or a compass image indicating a heading of the vehicle, depending on whether the road is not local, whether there is no next bifurcation, and whether there is not a lane over a past predetermined time (see at least Horihata, [0062] disclosing that when it is evaluated that the occupant can misidentify the planned travel route when the non-AR guide image Gi2 is displayed instead of the AR guide image Gil, the shape condition is not satisfied. Here, the road shape is the number of lanes provided on the road, the slope and curvature, the connection relationship with other roads, and the like. For example, when the section where the route guidance is performed includes one lane, the lane of the destination is uniquely determined, so that the planned travel route can be accurately provided by the non-AR guidance image Gi2, and the shape condition is satisfied. In addition, if there is no other intersection between the intersection where the right/left turn guidance is performed and the vehicle A, the intersection where the right/left turn is to be performed is uniquely determined, so that the non-AR guidance image Gi2 accurately provides the planned travel route, and the shape condition is satisfied. Further, when the road is a flat road with substantially no slope, it is possible to see the destination direction of the vehicle A, so that the planned travel route can be accurately provided by the non-AR guide image Gi2, and the shape condition can be established. The establishment of the shape condition may be determined by a combination of the plurality of cases described above, for example, when the road is a flat road and has only one lane ; Fig. 7, [0069]-[0071]; Fig. 8, [0089]; Fig. 12).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko and Horihata, to request the AR engine to output either the static carpet image or a compass image indicating a heading of the vehicle, depending on whether the road is not local, whether there is no next bifurcation, and whether there is not a lane over a past predetermined time based on the altitude change over the past predetermined distance being less than the preset distance, as further disclosed in Horihata, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 50, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. However, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitation taught by a comparable device in Horihata, where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor determines a slope of a road on which the vehicle travels (see at least Horihata, [0053] disclosing that the HCU 20 generates an AR guide image Gil to be superimposed on the road surface as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5. The AR guide image Gil is generated, for example, in a three-dimensional display mode (hereinafter, 3D display mode) in which the AR guide image Gil is continuously arranged on the road surface along the planned travel route. FIG. 4 is an example in which the AR guide image Gil is superimposed and displayed on a sloped road. FIG. 5 shows an example in which the AR guide image Gil is superimposed and displayed along the shape of the road where the number of lanes is increasing toward the travelling direction; [0071] disclosing that the display generation unit 206 specifies a three-dimensional position (i.e., the relative position) of the road surface relative to the vehicle A based on the position coordinates of the road surface and the position coordinates of the own vehicle. In addition, the display generation unit 206 calculates or acquires the slope information of the road surface based on the high-precision map data. The display generation unit 206 calculates the gradient information by, for example, a geometric calculation using the position coordinates of two points defining a slope. Alternatively, the display generation unit 206 may calculate the gradient information based on the three-dimensional shape information of the lane marking. Alternatively, the display generation unit 206 may estimate the gradient information based on the information that can estimate the gradient information among the information included in the high-precision map data), and
determines a slope of a first graphic object, which is output to overlap the second image based on the determined slope of the road (see at least Horihata, [0053]).
Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata are analogous are to claim 50 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Horihata relates to a display control device for displaying a virtual image (see at least Horihata, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to have the processor determine a slope of a road on which the vehicle travels, and determines a slope of a first graphic object, which is output to overlap the second image based on the determined slope of the road, and overlap a second image on which the calibration was performed, as disclosed in Horihata, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II and Ko as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0375055 to Jung et al. (hereafter Jung) and U.S. Patent Publication Number 2009/0312917 to Zawade et al. (hereafter Zawade).
As per claim 40, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. But, the difference between the Yagyu II, Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitations taught by comparable devices, Jung and Zawade, where it would be known to add:
wherein the AR adapter requests the AR engine to output ... to a next road without a guide point when a road has a guide point which is an intersection where a direction change needs to be performed, and a distance to the next guide point is within a predetermined distance (see at least Jung, [0118] disclosing that in FIG. 7A, the processor 180 may detect a vanishing line 710, a bonnet line 720, and a center line 730 from a vehicle front image photographed by the camera 121. As illustrated in FIG. 7B, the processor 180 may delete the area under the bonnet line 710 from the vehicle front image. The processor 180 may output navigation related information 740, on the area under the deleted bonnet line 710. For example, the processor 180 may display at least one of time information, location information, information of the road being driven, departure point information, departure time information, destination information, information of distance remaining to destination, information of time remaining to the destination, and estimated arrival time information, on the area under the bonnet line 710. The processor 180 may display a navigation map 750 and a navigation GUI 755, on one area of the display 151; [0125] disclosing that when the vehicle 10 gradually approaches the intersection, the processor 180 may gradually enlarge and display the front image while gradually changing the angle of view of the first camera), and
output a compass image to the next road ... (see at least Zawade, [0022] disclosing that once the off-road functionality is activated via control device 1, the compass will be superimposed on the navigation display. The display of the compass may be faded out and a different menu point be selected by activating the control device of the navigation device. While the route guidance of the navigation system is activated, the display will not be switched to the compass but instead the display of the route guidance remains superposed on the navigation display) ... .
Yagyu II, Jung and Zawade are analogous are to claim 40 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Jung relates to a mobile terminal that provides an augmented reality navigation screen in a state of being hold in a vehicle (see at least Jung, Abstract). Zawade relates to a device and a method for activating and/or deactivating functions of a vehicle on the display (see at least Zawade, [0001], [0022]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to have the AR adapter requests the AR engine to output to a next road without a guide point when a road has a guide point which is an intersection where a direction change needs to be performed, and a distance to the next guide point is within a predetermined distance, as disclosed in Jung, and to output a compass image to the next road, as disclosed in Zawade, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade as applied to claim 40 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2009/0312917 to Zawade et al. (hereafter Zawade).
As per claim 41, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade discloses all of the limitations of claim 40, as shown above. But the difference between the combination of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade, and the claimed invention is that the combination does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught by a comparable device in Horihata, where it would be known to add:
wherein the AR adapter requests the AR engine to output the static carpet image for a predetermined time based on there being no guide point and an altitude change over a past predetermined distance being greater than a specific distance (see at least Horihata, Fig. 8, [0059]; [0060] ; [0062] disclosing that if there is no other intersection between the intersection where the right/left turn guidance is performed and the vehicle A, the intersection where the right/left turn is to be performed is uniquely determined, so that the non-AR guidance image Gi2 accurately provides the planned travel route, and the shape condition is satisfied. Further, when the road is a flat road with substantially no slope, it is possible to see the destination direction of the vehicle A, so that the planned travel route can be accurately provided by the non-AR guide image Gi2, and the shape condition can be establish; [0113] disclosing that the display generation unit 206 reproduces the current traveling environment of the vehicle A in the virtual space based on the own vehicle position information based on the high-precision map data, the high-precision map data, the detection information, and the like. More specifically, as shown in FIG. 12, the display generation unit 206 sets the own vehicle object AO at a reference position in a virtual three-dimensional space. The display generation unit 206 maps the road model of the shape indicated by the map data in the three-dimensional space in association with the own vehicle object AO based on the own vehicle position information).
Yagyu II, Ko, Jung, Zawade and Horihata are analogous are to claim 41 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Kim relates to a method, apparatus, computer program, and computer-readable recording medium for detecting a lane marking based on a vehicle image (see at last Kim, [0002]). Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Jung relates to a mobile terminal that provides an augmented reality navigation screen in a state of being hold in a vehicle (see at least Jung, Abstract). Zawade relates to a device and a method for activating and/or deactivating functions of a vehicle on the display (see at least Zawade, [0001], [0022]). Horihata relates to a display control device for displaying a virtual image (see at least Horihata, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, Jung and Zawade, to request the AR engine output the static carpet image for a predetermined time based on there being no guide point and an altitude change over a past predetermined distance being greater than a specific distance, as disclosed in Horihata, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II and Ko as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0318135 to Chandupatta et al. (hereafter Chandupatta).
As per claim 43, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. The difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitation taught by a comparable device in Chandupatta, where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor turns off an AR mode in which the augmented reality is implemented and outputs an execution screen of the navigation application based on there being no transmission of GPS data for a predetermined period of time, there being a transmission delay for a predetermined time or more which occurs a specific number of times within a predetermined time, there being no transmission of gyro data being performed, there being no data transmission of an accelerator, there being no transmission of standard definition (SD) MAP being performed for a predetermined time, or where camera image quality is lowered down to a specific level (see at least Chandupatta, [0102] disclosing that plan ahead and buffer data for certain distance <interpreted as AR mode is off>. For example, a navigation application is aware of GPS loss (area shown in red on the route map, as explained above) for certain distance can buffer the navigation data prior to start of the journey. In another example, if any 5G service application like media streaming application is aware signal loss, the system may buffer the media contents ahead for that duration of signal loss and provide seamless user experience in viewing content).
Yagyu II, Ko and Chandupatta are analogous are to claim 43 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Chandupatta relates to an in-vehicle augmented reality projector and related operations thereof (see at least Chandupatta, [0005]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to have the processor turn off an AR mode in which the augmented reality is implemented and outputs an execution screen of the navigation application based on there being no transmission of GPS data for a predetermined period of time, there being a transmission delay for a predetermined time or more which occurs a specific number of times within a predetermined time, there being no transmission of gyro data being performed, there being no data transmission of an accelerator, there being no transmission of standard definition (SD) MAP being performed for a predetermined time, or where camera image quality is lowered down to a specific level, as disclosed in Chandupatta, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 44, 46, 47, 49, 51 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II and Ko as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2017/0161009 to Ogisu et al. (hereafter Ogisu).
As per claim 44, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitation taught by Ogisu, a comparable device where it would be known to add:
based on a GPS direction, which is the direction that the vehicle is heading, being consistent with a standard definition (SD) MAP direction indicating an angle at which a next guide point is located (see at least Ogisu, Fig. 16, Fig. 17, [0129]; [0136] disclosing that the change in emphasized display is not limited in units of guidance information as illustrated in FIGS. 14A and 14B. The first guidance information G1 or the segments S1, S2, S3 may be divided into a plurality of parts to be changed as illustrated in FIG. 16. Alternatively, a boundary between an emphasized part and a non-emphasized part may be gradationally displayed as illustrated in FIG. 17. That is, the number of divided parts to be gradually changed may be increased),
the processor outputs a fusion carpet image mapped to a lane on which the vehicle is traveling based on a SD map, or an ego lane carpet image displayed the lane identified in the image photographed through a camera, and overlaps the outputted carpet image with the second image (see at least Ogisu, [0110] disclosing that with regard to Figs. 10A to 10C, the display control unit 16 detects deviation of the lane on the basis of an image from the camera for shooting a scene in front of the vehicle, for example. When detecting that the vehicle deviates to the right lane, the display control unit 16 then displays the notification information G41 indicating the fact (=surrounding display information, right display information) on the right display 14 as illustrated in FIG. 10A. In the example illustrated in FIGS. 10A to 10C, the segments S arranged in the right-left direction are blinked as the notification information G41 in the display control unit 16; [0129] disclosing that the HUD device 1 is connected with the navigation device 22. As well known, the navigation device 22 has a means for acquiring a current position such as GPS (Global Positioning System) receiver, a storage means such as hard disk for storing map information therein, a display unit such as liquid crystal display for displaying a map, guidance information, or the like, and a control means such as CPU for searching a route from a current position to a set destination ; [0130]).
Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu are analogous art to claim 44 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to output a fusion carpet image mapped to a lane on which the vehicle is traveling based on a SD map, or an ego lane carpet image displayed the lane identified in the image photographed through a camera, and overlaps the outputted carpet image with the second image, based on a GPS direction, which is the direction that the vehicle is heading, being consistent with a standard definition (SD) MAP direction indicating an angle at which a next guide point is located, as further disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 46, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. But the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention it that neither Yagyu II nor KO explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Ogisu, a comparable device where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor further displays the wall image when the static carpet image overlaps the lane in which the vehicle is driving in the second image and enters within a predetermined distance from an intersection (see at least Ogisu, Fig. 19, [0148] disclosing that with regard to Fig. 19A, rectangular segments S4, S5, and S6 are sterically displayed apart as the third guidance information G3 in the virtual image V8 (displayed to cause the observer to feel closer to him/her rightward). The third guidance information G3 (the segments S4, S5, and S6) may be displayed (drawn) with one vanishing point; [0149] disclosing that the third guidance information G3 may be displayed immediately before the right turn point as illustrated in FIG. 20, or may be always displayed until the completion of right turn after the route guidance information is displayed (after the second guidance information G2 starts being displayed) as illustrated in Figs. 21; Fig. 20).
Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu are analogous art to claim 46 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to display the wall image when the dynamic carpet image or the static carpet image overlaps the lane in which the vehicle is driving in the second image and enters within a predetermined distance from an intersection, as disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 47, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu discloses all of the limitations of claim 46, as shown above. Ogisu further discloses the following limitations:
while the carpet image overlaps the lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling (see at least Ogisu, Fig. 19, [0148]; [0149]; Fig. 21, Fig. 20),
the processor outputs the wall image without outputting the carpet image when the vehicle enters within a second predetermined distance, shorter than a first predetermined distance with respect to the intersection (see at least Ogisu, [0149]; [0150]; [0151] disclosing that the third guidance information G3 is displayed on the right side of the first guidance information G1 when the first guidance information G1 is for right turn of the vehicle, and is displayed on the left side of the first guidance information G1 when the first guidance information G1 is for left turn of the vehicle, thereby further emphasizing left turn or right turn guidance; [0152] disclosing that the third guidance information G3 displayed on right turn is displayed to be closer to the observer rightward, and the right turn can be further emphasized in the traveling direction; [0153]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko and Ogisu, to output the wall image without outputting the carpet image when the vehicle enters within a second predetermined distance, shorter than a first predetermined distance with respect to the intersection, while the carpet image overlaps the lane on which the vehicle is currently traveling, as further disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 49, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu discloses all of the limitations of claim 47, as shown above. Ogisu further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the processor changes the wall image to the carpet image and outputs the carpet image to overlap the lane on which the vehicle is traveling, when the vehicle changes direction at the intersection (see at least Ogisu, Figs. 16, 17 showing the progression from top to bottom as the vehicle approaches the intersection, [0120]; [0136] disclosing that the first guidance information G1 or the segments S1, S2, S3 may be divided into a plurality of parts to be changed as illustrated in FIG. 16. Alternatively, a boundary between an emphasized part and a non-emphasized part may be gradationally displayed as illustrated in FIG. 17; Fig. 23, [0162] disclosing, with respect to Fig. 23, that when the guidance display parts P52 and P63 indicate right turn at the intersection Cc, as the vehicle approaches the intersection Cc, the guidance display part P63 of the sub-image P6 is gradually hidden from the end P62 to be shorter in the front-back direction and the road display part P51 entirely moves downward thereby to cause the observer to easily feel the vehicle's approach to the intersection Cc).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko and Ogisu, to have the processor change the wall image to the carpet image and output the carpet image to overlap the lane on which the vehicle is traveling, when the vehicle changes the direction at the intersection, as further disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 51, the combination of Yagyu II and Ko discloses all of the limitations of claim 36, as shown above. But the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitations taught by a comparable device in Ogisu, where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor outputs a static carpet image with a first length when a gyroscopic direction, which indicates a direction the vehicle is driven by a steering wheel, is not aligned with a center line of a road on which the vehicle is traveling in the image (see at least Ogisu, [0049], Fig. 10B and 10C; [0110] disclosing that When detecting that the vehicle deviates to the right lane, the display control unit 16 then displays the notification information G41 indicating the fact (=surrounding display information, right display information) on the right display 14 as illustrated in FIG. 10A. In the example illustrated in FIGS. 10A to 10C, the segments S arranged in the right-left direction are blinked as the notification information G41 in the display control unit 16; [0111] disclosing that when detecting an approaching object on the right side of the shooting area, the display control unit 16 displays the notification information G41 indicating the fact on the right display 14. Similarly, when detecting an approaching object on the left side of the shooting area, the display control unit 16 displays the notification information indicating the fact (=surrounding display information, left display information) on the left display 15. In this way, the displays 14 and 15 for displaying the notification information G41 thereon are switched depending on a direction in which an approaching object approaches), and
outputs a static carpet image with a second length longer than the first length when the gyroscopic direction is aligned with the center line (see at least Ogisu, [0112] disclosing that the segments S arranged in the right-left direction are displayed as the notification information G41 indicating that an approaching object is detected in the examples illustrated in Figs. 10A to 10C, but a striking mark M surrounding an approaching object is displayed in the example illustrated in Fig. 11. A traffic light, roads, and a pedestrian illustrated in Fig. 11 indicate an actual traffic light, roads, and pedestrian which can be seen beyond the windshield 3).
Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu are analogous art to claim 51 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to have the processor output a static carpet image with a first length when a gyroscopic direction, which indicates a direction the vehicle is driven by a steering wheel, is not aligned with a center line of a road on which the vehicle is traveling in the image, and output a static carpet image with a second length longer than the first length when the gyroscopic direction is aligned with the center line, as disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
As per claim 54, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu discloses all of the limitations of claim 45 (36) , as shown above. But the difference between the combination of Yagyu II and Ko and the claimed invention is that neither Yagyu II nor Ko explicitly teach the following limitations taught by a comparable device in Ogisu, where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor outputs a first type wall image on a lane adjacent to a lane on which the vehicle is traveling to indicate the direction of the route (see Ogisu, [0109] disclosing that with regard to FIGS. 9A to 9E describe the case in which the vehicle moves to the right lane, but when the vehicle moves to the left lane, the display control unit 16 displays the notification information G41 including the segments S, the gradation bar B, and the other vehicle's image Ct on the left display 15 when a following vehicle is present in the left lane. At this time, the segments S are sequentially lit from left to right, and a dark color indicating a danger in the gradation bar B moves from left to right, which are repeatedly performed. The other vehicle's image Ct is repeatedly moved from left to right),
outputs a second type wall image to indicate to keep a lane and a direction (see Ogisu, [0109]),
and outputs a third type wall image to indicate to cross an intersection (see Ogisu, [0109]; [0162] disclosing that with regard to FIG. 23, when the guidance display parts P52 and P63 indicate right turn at the intersection Cc, as the vehicle approaches the intersection Cc, the guidance display part P63 of the sub-image P6 is gradually hidden from the end P62 to be shorter in the front-back direction and the road display part P51 entirely moves downward thereby to cause the observer to easily feel the vehicle's approach to the intersection Cc.).
Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu are analogous art to claim 54 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, to have the processor output a first type wall image on a lane adjacent to a lane on which the vehicle is traveling to indicate the direction of the route, outputs a second type wall image to indicate to keep a lane and a direction, and outputs a third type wall image to indicate to cross an intersection, as disclosed in Ogisu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu as applied to claim 46 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0107201 to Yagyu et al. (hereafter Yagyu).
As per claim 48, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu discloses all of the limitations of claim 46, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Ogisu and the claimed invention is that the combination does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Yagyu, a comparable device where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor enlarges an output size of the wall image as a distance between the vehicle and the intersection decreases (see at least Yagyu, Figs. 5 and 42, progression from bottom to top; [0269] disclosing that in the route guidance display in Modification 28 to the above embodiments, as shown in FIG. 42, a large number of route guidance contents CTg AR-displaying an arrow-shaped road paint are superimposed on a road surface in a traveling direction. A size of each route guidance content CTg is gradually increased as it is brought closer to a guiding limit point Pe and a reference point GP. According to the foregoing, guiding for a lane change to a destination of guidance lane Lng is more highlighted as it is brought closer to a guiding limit point Pe).
Yagyu II, Ko, Ogisu and Yagyu are analogous are to claim 48 because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]). Yagyu relates to a device that acquires route content indicating a lane change trajectory which is superimposed and displayed based on the route information on a road surface (see Yagyu, Abstract, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II and modified by Ko and Ogisu, to have the processor enlarge an output size of the wall image as a distance between the vehicle and the intersection decreases, as disclosed in Yagyu, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 52 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata as applied to claim 39 above, and further in view of Ogisu and U.S. Patent Publication Number 2011/0066363 to Kimishima.
As per claim 52, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata discloses all of the limitations of claim 39, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II, Ko and Horihata and the claimed invention is that the combination does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught by comparable devices, Ogisu and Kimishima, where it would be known to add:
wherein the compass image further includes a guide image for guiding a direction in which the vehicle should travel at a current location (see at least Ogisu, Fig. 15; [0133] disclosing that the first guidance information G1 and the second guidance information G2 (the segments S1, S2, and S3) are di splayed (drawn) with one vanishing point (or in one-point perspective) as illustrated in FIG. 15. That is, the first guidance information G1 and the sides of the segments S1, S2, and S3 are drawn to cross at a vanishing point X. By doing so, a sense of mixture into the background can be enhanced, and the first guidance information G1 and the second guidance information G2 seem to the observer to be continuous. That is, the first guidance information G1 and the second guidance information G2 are displayed to be continuous as a series of information),
wherein the display position of the guide image changes along a border of the compass image (see at least Kimishima, Fig. 8A; [0089] disclosing that the navigation unit 26 outputs the map image including the current position of the vehicle 9 and the compass image GC to the display unit 2. The display unit 2 displays a vehicle navigation image GV shown in FIG. 8A in which the compass image GC is superimposed on the map image)
Yagyu II, Ko, Horihata, Ogisu and Kimishima are analogues art to claim 52, because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Horihata relates to a display control device for displaying a virtual image (see at least Horihata, [0002]). Ogisu relates to a vehicle display device mounted on a vehicle (see at least Ogisu, [0001]). Kimishima relates to navigation apparatus, operation control methods, and a mobile terminal apparatus in which an orientation is detected with a geomagnetic sensor and a map is displayed while the apparatus is attached to or detached from a vehicle (see at least Kimishima, [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko and Horihata, to have the compass image further includes a guide image for guiding a direction in which the vehicle should travel at a current location, as disclosed in Ogisu, and to have the display position of the guide image change along a border of the compass image, as disclosed in Kimishima, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade as applied to claim 40 above, and further in view of Kimishima.
As per claim 53, the combination of Yagyu II, Ko, Jung and Zawade discloses all of the limitations of claim 40, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Yagyu II, Ko Jung and Zawade and the claimed invention is that the combination does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught by comparable device, Kimishima, where it would be known to add:
wherein the processor changes either a size of the compass image or the output position of the compass image, depending on whether an angle between a direction that the vehicle is currently heading and a direction at which the next point is located exceeds a predetermined angle (see at least Kimishima, Fig. 8A; [0089]).
Yagyu II, Ko, Jung, Zawade and Kimishima are analogues art to claim 53, because they are in the same field of route guidance devices the realize augmented reality to provide the route guidance. Yagyu II relates to a display control device that acquires external information based on recognition of a traveling environment around the vehicle, and causes the head-up display to display a superimposition content for providing a route guidance to be superimposed on a foreground in a guidance area (see at least Yagyu II, Abstract). Ko relates to an electronic apparatus and a control method thereof which can perform a position recognition of a lane where a vehicle is located, and a driving-related guide according to the same (see at least Ko, [0003]). Jung relates to a mobile terminal that provides an augmented reality navigation screen in a state of being hold in a vehicle (see at least Jung, Abstract). Zawade relates to a device and a method for activating and/or deactivating functions of a vehicle on the display (see at least Zawade, [0001], [0022]). Kimishima relates to navigation apparatus, operation control methods, and a mobile terminal apparatus in which an orientation is detected with a geomagnetic sensor and a map is displayed while the apparatus is attached to or detached from a vehicle (see at least Kimishima, [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device, as disclosed in Yagyu II, as modified by Ko, Jung and Zawade, to change either a size of the compass image or the output position of the compass image, depending on whether an angle between a direction that the vehicle is currently heading and a direction at which the next point is located exceeds a predetermined angle, as disclosed in Kimishima, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
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 PATRICK M. BRADY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7458. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4;30 pm.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
PATRICK M. BRADY III
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/PATRICK M BRADY/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights