DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. In response to the amendment filed 02 January 2026, claims 1-20 remain pending.
Drawings
3. The corrected drawings were received on 02 January 2026. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh (US 2022/0036758 A1) in view of Webb et al. (US 2018/0308379 A1) and Akatsuka et al. (US 2007/0072154 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 19, Oh discloses a virtual driving simulation method (as per claim 1) and device for performing the method using a memory and processor (as per claim 10), comprising:
generating, by a virtualization implementation part, virtualization data; generating, by a model generation part, modeling data based on the virtualization data; and generating, by a simulation implementation part, virtual driving data (see Par’s. 145-152 – server 600 provides virtualization data, data modeling a vehicle, and virtual driving data, in order to provide a virtual test-driving experience of a specific vehicle); and
transmitting, by a communication part, the virtual driving data to a simulation cabin and a simulation wall (see Fig’s. 1-2, Par’s. 61-70 – virtual driving data transmitted to user to simulate cabin and wall) (as per claim 1), and
a virtual driving simulation system comprising: a processor (processor assembly 120) for generating virtual driving data (Par’s. 77-78);
a data server (600 - Par. 145) for collecting and providing to the digital twin device external data of a real-world environment to be a background for virtual driving (Par’s. 144-147, 152, 171);
a simulation wall that displays an image of the virtual driving environment on a screen based on the virtual driving data generated by the digital twin device (e.g. window display device 300 – Par’s. 124-128); and
a simulation cabin that provides a sense of virtual driving to occupants based on the virtual driving data generated by the digital twin device (Fig. 2, Par’s. 61-70) (as per claim 19).
Oh does not appear to disclose generating the modeling data for representation in a digital twin environment, generating the virtual driving data based on physical factors including interaction and movement between elements in the digital twin environment; and transmitting the data such that the simulation cabin is moved based on movement data in the virtual driving data (as per claims 1, 10 and 19). However, Webb discloses a system for recreating a virtual driving simulation (see Par. 56, 59) based on data collected from a digital twin environment (see Par. 32; the digital twin is more often described in Webb as a digital double – Par. 53). Webb discloses generating virtual driving data based on physical factors including interactions and movements between elements in the digital twin (Par. 58), and transmitting this data to a simulator to provide these movement experiences to a person in the simulation, for example during demonstration of vehicle features or training (see Par’s. 54-58). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Oh by providing using a digital twin environment to obtain virtualization data to be sent to the simulation cabin and wall, as taught by Webb, to obtain predictable results of enhancing the realism of the simulation.
The combination of Oh and Webb does not explicitly disclose wherein the simulation cabin includes at least one pillar display, and the virtual driving data includes an image to be displayed on the at least one pillar display (as per claims 1, 10 and 19). However, Akatsuka discloses a virtual vehicle surroundings display system that includes a pillar display which displays driving data to a user (see Par. 39-40). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Oh by providing a pillar display in the simulation cabin, as taught by Akatsuka. Such a modification would be a use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Regarding claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20, Oh in view of Webb and Akatsuka further discloses the image to be output to the at least one pillar display comprises video see-through and augmented reality (AR) image data synchronized with the simulation wall (Oh discloses video see-through and augmented reality – see Par’s. 45-50 – it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to output this data on the pillar display of Akatsuka with the simulation wall data, to obtain predictable results of enhancing the realism of the simulation) (as per claims 2, 11 and 20),
the generating the virtualization data comprising: receiving, from a data server, real-world environment data for a virtual driving environment to be a background for virtual driving, and data on a mobility to drive the virtual driving environment; and generating the virtualization data based on the real-world environment data and the data on the mobility (Akatsuka – vehicle surroundings image providing system – Par’s. 61-63) (as per claims 3 and 12),
the modeling data is generated by performing a modeling operation on the virtualization data for representation in the digital twin environment (Par’s. 145-152) (as per claims 4 and 13),
the virtual driving data is generated by a combination of the virtualization data and the modeling data (Par’s. 145-152) (as per claims 5 and 14),
the virtual driving data comprises mobility data and driving environment data (Oh – operation of steering whell – Par. 241; weather conditions, Par. 237) (as per claims 6 and 15),
the mobility data comprises at least one of a driving direction, a turning angle, a speed of the vehicle, or a combination thereof (Oh – operation of the steering wheel – Par. 241)) (as per claims 7 and 16),
the driving environment data comprises at least one of ambient traffic conditions, road conditions, weather conditions, or a combination thereof (Oh, Par. 237) (as per claims 8 and 17), and
in the transmitting the virtual driving data, the virtual driving data transmitted to the simulation cabin and the simulation wall is the data that is synchronized in real-time (Oh – Par’s. 241-242) (as per claims 9 and 18).
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the section 103 rejection claims 1, 10 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the interpretation of claims 10 and 19 under section 112(f), in view of the corresponding arguments, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claims are no longer interpreted under 112(f).
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER EGLOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-3548. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Peter R Egloff/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights