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(s) 1-11 is pending for examination.
This Action is made NON-FINAL.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested DISPLAY DEVICE, COMPUTER PROGRAM, AND SETTING METHOD FOR SETTING OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COORDINATE SPACE AND THE POSITION OF THE ROAD
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are “an interface configured to…” as recited in claim 1, “an output interface configured to….” as recited in claims 2 and 7, and a “ input instruction interface configured to….” as recited in claim 3.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Regarding the interface, the output interface, and the input instruction interface the specification is devoid of an description of structure for the interfaces.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim(s) 1 the “an interface configured to…” is recited. The specification fails to describe the structure of the “interface” which invokes 112f and thus the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
In claim(s) 2 and 7 the “an output interface configured to…” is recited. The specification fails to describe the structure of the “output interface” which invokes 112f and thus the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
In claim(s) 3 the “an input instruction interface configured to…” is recited. The specification fails to describe the structure of the “an input instruction interface” which invokes 112f and thus the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Claims 2-9 do not cure the deficiencies of claim(s) 1-3 and 7 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 limitation “an interface configured to…” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of any description of the structure of the “interface”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim 2 and 7 limitation “an output interface configured to…” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of any description of the structure of the “output interface”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim 3 limitation “an input instruction interface configured to…” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of any description of the structure of the “input instruction interface”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2-9 do not cure the deficiencies of claim(s) 1-3 and 7 and are therefore rejected on the same basis.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machine translation of Deng et al. (CN 111626189 A, hereinafter known as Deng) in view of Machine translation of Lee et al. (KR 20170094805 A, hereinafter known as Lee) and Lin et al. (US 20130135473 A1, hereinafter known as Lin).
Regarding Claim 1, Deng teaches A display device comprising: a display configured to display a setting screen for setting a roadside monitoring device
{Page 4 “The road surface abnormality detection method provided by the embodiment of the present invention is applied to an electronic device, and the electronic device can be a PC, a tablet computer, or other devices, or a smart image acquisition device.”
Page 5 “After the electronic device acquires the second image collected by the monitoring device, it can determine the second driving trajectory of each vehicle in each lane in the second image, and receive the user's lane line division instruction. The user's lane line division instruction is the user In the second image, hand-animate each lane line and the upper and lower bottom edges. When the user draws a line on the second image displayed by the electronic device, the electronic device can identify the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinate information of the upper and lower sides, and then according to the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinates of the upper and lower sides The information takes a third image in the second image. In order to ensure the accuracy of image conversion, the top and bottom edges are required to be parallel.”
}
an interface configured to receive an input of a lane shape line indicating a shape of a lane in the target area, and an input of a mark point indicating a specific position in the target area, wherein the setting screen includes circuitry configured to display the lane shape line and the mark point inputted through the interface so that the lane shape line and the mark point are superimposed on an image obtained by a camera that images the target area, and
{ Page 5 “After the electronic device acquires the second image collected by the monitoring device, it can determine the second driving trajectory of each vehicle in each lane in the second image, and receive the user's lane line division instruction. The user's lane line division instruction is the user In the second image, hand-animate each lane line and the upper and lower bottom edges. When the user draws a line on the second image displayed by the electronic device, the electronic device can identify the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinate information of the upper and lower sides, and then according to the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinates of the upper and lower sides The information takes a third image in the second image. In order to ensure the accuracy of image conversion, the top and bottom edges are required to be parallel.”
Where the corner of the lines meet and generate a coordinate can be said to be mark points.
}
display coordinate values corresponding to the mark point, and the coordinate values are coordinate values, in a coordinate space, which indicate a position of an object detected by the radio wave radar for infrastructure.
{Page 5 “After the electronic device acquires the second image collected by the monitoring device, it can determine the second driving trajectory of each vehicle in each lane in the second image, and receive the user's lane line division instruction. The user's lane line division instruction is the user In the second image, hand-animate each lane line and the upper and lower bottom edges. When the user draws a line on the second image displayed by the electronic device, the electronic device can identify the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinate information of the upper and lower sides, and then according to the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinates of the upper and lower sides The information takes a third image in the second image. In order to ensure the accuracy of image conversion, the top and bottom edges are required to be parallel.”
Where the corner of the lines meet and generate a coordinate can be said to be mark points.
}
Deng does not teach, a setting screen for setting a radio wave radar for infrastructure, the radio wave radar being configured to transmit a radio wave to a target area, and receive a reflected wave from a vehicle to detect the vehicle in the target area;
and
display coordinate values corresponding to the mark point
However, Lee teaches a setting screen for setting a radio wave radar for infrastructure, the radio wave radar being configured to transmit a radio wave to a target area, and receive a reflected wave from a vehicle to detect the vehicle in the target area;
{Para [0007] “According to the above object, the present invention provides a radar-video camera integrated traffic information measuring system, which combines a radar, a GNSS, a position information system, a motion sensor, and a digital video camera.”
Para [0008] “In the above, the present invention integrates geographical information including an object monitoring method of a radar and an actual lane appearing in a video camera, thereby precisely measuring the position and speed of the vehicle sensed by the radar in each lane. In the control system, The traffic information of the same point and the same time point is checked on the information that is considered to be the unexpected out of the traffic information measured by the user and the traffic information is provided in real time.”
}
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 Deng to incorporate the teachings of Lee to use radar device instead of just a generic monitoring device because it increases accuracy of measurement as discussed in Lee para [0005]
Deng in view of Lee does not teach, display coordinate values corresponding to the mark point
However, Lin teaches display coordinate values corresponding to the mark point
{Para [0027] “The GPS system 23 is linked to the vehicle recorder 22, and is turned on/off by the micro-processing unit 26 to obtain a geographic coordinate P of the vehicle, display the geographic coordinate P on the display unit 27, and then transfer the geographic coordinate P to the comparison unit 24 or save the geographic coordinate P in the storage unit 29. The storage unit 29 additionally pre-saves a predetermined geographic coordinate group of non-safe parking positions PN and a predetermined radius R. Examples of the predetermined geographic coordinate group of non-safe parking positions PN include the road sides where vehicles are susceptible to crashing and the hot points of automobile theft. The driver may input and display the geographic coordinates of non-safe parking positions on the display unit 27 via the operation interface 25, and then instruct the micro-processing unit 26 to save the geographic coordinates in the storage unit 29. Alternatively, the micro-processing unit 26 may download the geographic coordinates of hot points of automobile theft or accident from the cloud database of automobile service providers or police statistics and then save the downloaded data in the storage unit 29.”
}
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 Deng in view of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Lin to display input coordinates because it allows a user to confirm the input is correct increasing convenience.
Regarding Claim 2, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1. Deng further teaches further comprising an output interface configured to output setting information for setting a position and a shape of a lane in the coordinate space, based on the lane shape line and the mark point received through the interface and on the coordinate values.
{ Page 5 “After the electronic device acquires the second image collected by the monitoring device, it can determine the second driving trajectory of each vehicle in each lane in the second image, and receive the user's lane line division instruction. The user's lane line division instruction is the user In the second image, hand-animate each lane line and the upper and lower bottom edges. When the user draws a line on the second image displayed by the electronic device, the electronic device can identify the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinate information of the upper and lower sides, and then according to the coordinate information of each lane line and the coordinates of the upper and lower sides The information takes a third image in the second image. In order to ensure the accuracy of image conversion, the top and bottom edges are required to be parallel.”
}
Regarding Claim 4, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1. Lin further teaches wherein the circuitry receives the coordinate values inputted through the interface, and displays the received coordinate values.
{ Para [0027] “The GPS system 23 is linked to the vehicle recorder 22, and is turned on/off by the micro-processing unit 26 to obtain a geographic coordinate P of the vehicle, display the geographic coordinate P on the display unit 27, and then transfer the geographic coordinate P to the comparison unit 24 or save the geographic coordinate P in the storage unit 29. The storage unit 29 additionally pre-saves a predetermined geographic coordinate group of non-safe parking positions PN and a predetermined radius R. Examples of the predetermined geographic coordinate group of non-safe parking positions PN include the road sides where vehicles are susceptible to crashing and the hot points of automobile theft. The driver may input and display the geographic coordinates of non-safe parking positions on the display unit 27 via the operation interface 25, and then instruct the micro-processing unit 26 to save the geographic coordinates in the storage unit 29. Alternatively, the micro-processing unit 26 may download the geographic coordinates of hot points of automobile theft or accident from the cloud database of automobile service providers or police statistics and then save the downloaded data in the storage unit 29.”
}
Regarding Claim 9, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1. Lee further teaches wherein the radio wave radar for infrastructure includes a fixing member that fixes the camera, with an optical axis direction of the camera being aligned with an axial direction of a radio wave irradiation axis of the radio wave radar for infrastructure.
{Fig. 2 and Para [0013] “The radar sends a radio wave to the object and examines the reflected wave reflected to show the size, position, moving direction, and speed of the object in polar coordinates. The object recognition of the radar is very precise and accurate, but the traffic situation has the disadvantage that it can not obtain the traffic information by the traffic on the road of the specific area. Therefore, in the present invention, the radar and the video camera are integrally formed so that the road traffic situation can be recognized by the lane, and the screen area displayed by the radar is synchronized with the position according to the image recognized by the video camera.”
If the camera and radar are housed in the same units and are capturing the same scene the imaging axis of each must be aligned.
}
Regarding claim 10, it recites A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Additionally Deng teaches non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program for causing a computer to perform the steps of
{ Page 4 “The road surface abnormality detection method provided by the embodiment of the present invention is applied to an electronic device, and the electronic device can be a PC, a tablet computer, or other devices, or a smart image acquisition device.”
}
Regarding claim 11, it recites A method having limitations similar to those of claim 1 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machine translation of Deng et al. (CN 111626189 A, hereinafter known as Deng) in view of Machine translation of Lee et al. (KR 20170094805 A, hereinafter known as Lee), Lin et al. (US 20130135473 A1, hereinafter known as Lin), and official notice.
Regarding Claim 3, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1.
Deng in view of Lee and Lin does not teach, wherein the setting screen further includes an input instruction interface configured to receive an instruction to input the mark point, and
under a condition the instruction to input the mark point has been received by the input instruction interface, input of the mark point on the image is allowed.
However, Official notice teaches wherein the setting screen further includes an input instruction interface configured to receive an instruction to input the mark point, and
under a condition the instruction to input the mark point has been received by the input instruction interface, input of the mark point on the image is allowed
{It is common practice to not allow input of data without a prompt to do so. Greyed out input fields are a common example.
}
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 Deng in view of Lee and Lin to incorporate the teachings of Official Notice to only allow input after a prompt because it prevents accidental inputs of data.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machine translation of Deng et al. (CN 111626189 A, hereinafter known as Deng) in view of Machine translation of Lee et al. (KR 20170094805 A, hereinafter known as Lee), Lin et al. (US 20130135473 A1, hereinafter known as Lin), and Han et al. (US 20210001877 A1, hereinafter known as Han).
Regarding Claim 5, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1.
Deng in view of Lee and Lin does not teach, wherein the display displays, on the image, selectable candidate points that are candidates for the mark point, and a candidate point selected through the interface is set as the mark point.
However, Han teaches wherein the display displays, on the image, selectable candidate points that are candidates for the mark point, and a candidate point selected through the interface is set as the mark point.
{Para [0056] “In some embodiments, the system may automatically determine the lane connectivity and may configure a user interface that displays the automatically determined lane connectivity to a user or operator for verification. The user/operator may approve the lane connectivity at the intersection determined by the system or may manually correct it. Therefore, some embodiments may enable semi-automated lane connectivity calculations which may be faster and more accurate than using an entirely manual process or an entirely automated process.”
}
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 Deng in view of Lee and Lin to incorporate the teachings of Han to have candidate points that can be selected because it allows for faster execution while maintaining accuracy as discussed by Han in para [0056] “In some embodiments, the system may automatically determine the lane connectivity and may configure a user interface that displays the automatically determined lane connectivity to a user or operator for verification. The user/operator may approve the lane connectivity at the intersection determined by the system or may manually correct it. Therefore, some embodiments may enable semi-automated lane connectivity calculations which may be faster and more accurate than using an entirely manual process or an entirely automated process.”
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machine translation of Deng et al. (CN 111626189 A, hereinafter known as Deng) in view of Machine translation of Lee et al. (KR 20170094805 A, hereinafter known as Lee), Lin et al. (US 20130135473 A1, hereinafter known as Lin), and Yoshizawa et al. (US 12306302 B2, hereinafter known as Han).
Regarding Claim 6, Deng in view of Lee and Lin teaches The display device according to claim 1.
Deng in view of Lee and Lin does not teach, wherein the display displays a movement locus of the object detected by the radio wave radar for infrastructure so that the movement locus is superimposed on the image.
However, Yoshizawa teaches wherein the display displays a movement locus of the object detected by the radio wave radar for infrastructure so that the movement locus is superimposed on the image.
{Column 14 “The output part 224 creates image data for displaying by using the distance measuring point group data and outputs the created image data to the display 300. In addition, the output part 224 may output a count value of the object or objects, the movement locus or loci, the entering determination, performed by the object determination part 223, thereto. In addition, an alert may be outputted by the entering determination. The outputting of the alert includes providing the outputted image data with a warning message and outputting of warning sound from the speaker. In addition, the output part 224 may provide an object determined by the object determination part 223 with a detection frame. Furthermore, in the image data outputted by the output part 224, by referencing the history information data, the pixels with substitution may be displayed in a manner in which the pixels with substitution are identifiable from other pixels.”
}
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 Deng in view of Lee and Lin to incorporate the teachings of Yoshizawa to display a movement locus superimposed on an image because it allows a viewer to determine if a lane is abnormal Deng page 5 “After the electronic device determines the first driving trajectory of each vehicle, it can identify the innermost trajectory and the outermost trajectory. In the embodiment of the present invention, the inner area of the innermost trajectory line and the outer area of the outermost trajectory line may be respectively regarded as the vehicle non-entry area.
S103: Determine whether the vehicle has not entered the area and whether the preset obstacle area can be accommodated, and if so, determine that the lane is abnormal.” It should be noted trajectory line can be considered a movement locus
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 and 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 ALEXANDER MATTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4296. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, James Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. 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.
/A.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/JAMES J LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668