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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210178731 A1 to Klein et al.
Regarding Claim 1. Klein discloses a panel of a vehicle, comprising: an outer layer (Fig. 4B outer pane 1); an inner layer (Fig. 4B inner pane 2) that is positioned closer to an interior surface of the vehicle than the outer layer; a mask layer (Fig. 4B tinted region 6) positioned between the outer layer and the inner layer (See at least Fig. 4B); and an active layer positioned between the mask layer and the inner layer (Fig. 4B element 5), the active layer positioned adjacent to an outer edge of the panel and extending from the outer edge of the panel toward a central portion of the panel (as shown in Fig. 4A and Fig. 4B), wherein the active layer includes a first independently controllable active element configured to limit viewing of the mask layer when viewed from a cabin of the vehicle (See Fig. 4A-4B element 5 and tinted region 6, para 121-122).
Regarding Claim 2. Klein further discloses the active layer includes a second independently controllable active element, wherein the first independently controllable active element and the second independently controllable active element are configured to have a high transmissivity state and a low transmissivity state (See Fig. 6 “strip-like segments” para 132 “in each case a separate electrical connection. The segments can thus be switched independently of one another” para 133 “the darkened functional element 5 can be adjusted by the segmentation. Thus, depending on the position of the sun, the driver can darken the entire sun visor or even only part of it. The figure indicates that the upper half of the sun visor is darkened and the lower half is transparent”), wherein the first independently controllable active element and the second independently controllable active element are configured to display a color when in the low transmissivity state (para 62 “the tinted or colored region can be colored or tinted”).
Regarding Claim 3. Klein further discloses the active layer includes an array of independently controllable active elements (See Fig. 6 para 132 “isolation lines 16 separate, in particular, the electrodes 12, 13 into strips isolated from one another”), wherein the array of independently controllable active elements includes the first independently controllable active element and the second independently controllable active element (See Fig. 6), wherein each of the independently controllable active elements is configured to have a high transmissivity state and a low transmissivity state (para 133), wherein the independently controllable active elements are configured to display a color when in the low transmissivity state (para 62).
Regarding Claim 5. Klein further discloses a portion of the array of independently controllable active elements is configured to change between the high transmissivity state and the low transmissivity state to adjust a width of an opaque portion of the active layer relative to a width of a transparent portion of the active layer (See Fig. 6 and para 133), wherein the opaque portion of the active layer extends between an outer edge of the transparent portion and an inner edge of an interior trim of the vehicle (as shown in Fig, 4A-Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 6. Klein further discloses the width of the opaque portion that extends between the outer edge of the transparent portion and the inner edge of the interior trim of the vehicle is approximately constant (as shown in Fig. 4A-Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 9. Klein discloses a panel of a vehicle, comprising: an outer layer (Fig. 4B outer pane 1); an inner layer that is positioned closer to an interior surface of the vehicle than the outer layer (Fig. 4B inner pane 2); a mask layer positioned between the outer layer and the inner layer (Fig. 4B tinted region 6); and an active layer positioned between the mask layer and the inner layer (Fig. 4B element 5), the active layer extending at least partially around a perimeter of the panel and from an outer edge of the panel toward a central portion of the panel (See Fig. 4A), wherein the active layer includes a first independently controllable active element that is configured to have an high transmissivity state and a low transmissivity state based on a signal received from a sensor (para 58-59).
Regarding Claim 10. Klein further discloses and the active layer includes a second independently controllable active element (para 132), wherein the first independently controllable active element and the second independently controllable active element are configured to display a color when in the low transmissivity state (para 62 and para 133).
Regarding Claim 11. Klein further discloses the first independently controllable active element is configured to limit viewing of the mask layer when in the low transmissivity state (See Fig. 4A-4B element 5 and tinted region 6, para 121-122).
Regarding Claim 12. Klein further discloses the active layer includes an array of independently controllable active elements, and the array of independently controllable active elements includes the first independently controllable active element and the second independently controllable active element (See Fig. 6 “strip-like segments” para 132 “in each case a separate electrical connection. The segments can thus be switched independently of one another”).
Regarding Claim 13. Klein further discloses a size of an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to the signal indicating that a shape of an eye of an occupant indicates that the occupant is squinting (para 59 “can be controlled by contactless methods, for example, by gesture recognition, or as a function of the state of the pupil or eyelid”).
Regarding Claim 14. Klein further discloses a size of an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to the signal indicating that a brightness of an external environment is greater than a threshold value (para 59 “can be controlled by sensors that detect incidence of light on the pane”).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210178731 A1 to Klein et al. as applied to claim 3
Regarding Claim 4. As stated above Klein discloses all the limitations of base claim 3.
Klein does not specifically disclose the first independently controllable active element is configured to approximately match a color of an interior trim of the vehicle.
However, the matching of color from an element of a panel of a vehicle and an interior trim is directed to an aesthetic design. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947) (The court found that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include that the first independently controllable active element is configured to approximately match a color of an interior trim of the vehicle.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210178731 A1 to Klein et al. as applied to claim 12 in view of US 20160039271 A1 to Okamoto et al.
Regarding Claim 15. As stated above Klein discloses all the limitations of base claim 12.
Klein does not specifically disclose a shape of an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to a sound.
However, Okamoto discloses a shape of an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to a sound (para 48 “microphone 82d to gather the voice of the passenger” and para 50 “calculation portions 73-76, and results of the calculations are integrated at the shielding operation calculation portion 73 and outputted to the shielding-means control portion 71. Based on the control signal of the shielding-means control portion 71, the view-limitation range is set as shown in FIG. 3”), as the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP2143(I)(B), KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include that a shape of an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to a sound.
Regarding Claim 16. Okamoto further discloses an opaque portion of the active layer is configured to provide a visual cue to an occupant based on a road condition (para 56, it is noted that any visible event will provide a visual cue to an occupant).
Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210178731 A1 to Klein et al. in view of US 20160039271 A1 to Okamoto et al.
Regarding Claim 17. Klein discloses a vehicle window for limiting viewing of a mask layer, comprising: a central portion through which an external environment can be viewed through the vehicle window (See Fig. 4A vision area B); and an active layer (Fig. 4B element 5) that partially extends around a perimeter of the vehicle window and from an outer edge of the vehicle window toward the central portion (See Fig. 4A and Fig. 4B) and includes an array of independently controllable active elements having a visual characteristic configured to change in response to a signal (Fig. 6 and para 132).
Klein does not specifically disclose the active layer that extends around a perimeter.
However, Okamoto discloses the active layer that extends around a perimeter (See at least FIG. 3), as the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP2143(I)(B), KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include that the active layer that extends around a perimeter.
Regarding Claim 18. Klein further discloses the visual characteristic is configured to change by modification of a width of an opaque portion of the active layer that extends from the outer edge of the vehicle window (See at least para 132-133).
Regarding Claim 19. Klein further discloses a size of the opaque portion of the active layer is configured to change in response to input from an occupant (para 59).
Regarding Claim 20. Klein further discloses the visual characteristic is configured to change by a decrease of an opacity of the independently controllable active elements as the active layer extends toward the central portion of the vehicle window (para 133).
Regarding Claim 21. Okamoto further discloses the visual characteristic is configured to change by modification of a shape of an opaque portion of the active layer in response to a sound to change the visual characteristic (para 48 and para 50).
Regarding Claim 22. Okamoto further discloses the visual characteristic is configured to change by undulation of the shape of the opaque portion in response to the sound (para 50).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMOND C LAU whose telephone number is (571)272-5859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm EST.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/EDMOND C LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871