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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 12/04/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-16 and 18-19 are now pending in the application. Claims 1 and 4-5 have been amended and claims 2-3, 17 and previously withdrawn claims 20-31 have been canceled.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 201.04, 214.03, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on provisional application US 63368162 filed on 07/12/2022.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
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 1,4-10, 12, 14-16, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sobecki et al. (hereafter Sobecki, of record) US 20140376119 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) a vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. foldable rearview mirror assembly 10,210 with a powerfold actuator system, and vehicle electronic system(s), see , abstract, paragraphs [02, 03-08, 49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-120], Figs. 1-4, 21-24, 36-37), the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (10 and actuator system) comprising:
an exterior rearview mirror assembly (rearview mirror assembly 10, e.g. paragraphs [49-59,61-71], Figs. 1-4) comprising (i) a mounting base configured for attachment at a side of a vehicle equipped with the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (base 16 for vehicle 11 having 10, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2, 11-12), and (ii) a mirror head pivotable relative to the mounting base about a pivot axis (head portion 14, pivoted about pivot axis, e.g. powerfold mirror, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2, 11-12);
wherein the mirror head comprises a mirror reflective element (reflective element 12, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2); an electrically-operable actuator (electrically powered actuator 18, paragraphs [49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-4, 7-10), wherein the electrically-operable actuator is electrically operable to adjust the mirror head relative to the mounting base (as 18 adjusts 14 with respect to 16 paragraphs [49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5) between (i) a folded position, where the mirror head is pivoted in toward the side of the vehicle (i.e. as folded or park position of 14m as powerfold mirror 10,14 where the mirror head is pivotable between a drive or use position and folded or park position via actuator 18, abstract, paragraphs [3-4, 49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5),and (ii) an extended position, where the mirror head is pivoted out from the folded position so that the mirror reflective elements provides a rearward view to a driver of the vehicle (i.e. as use or drive position of 10,14, abstract, paragraphs [3-4, 49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5);
a positioning sensor and a magnetic element (rearward range sensor 28 with magnet and steel stamping, drive position sensor 30 with magnet, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
wherein the positioning sensor captures sensor data representative of a magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (as 28, 30 as magnetic sensors sense magnetic field of respective magnets, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
wherein one selected from the group consisting of (i) the positioning sensor is fixed relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element is disposed at the mirror head and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the positioning sensor (e.g. as 28 as hall effect sensor mounted on base 16 with magnet e.g. arc-shaped magnet mounted near arm 16 and rotated with mirror head 10, 14, also as magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10) and (ii) the magnetic element is fixed relative to the mounting base and the positioning sensor is disposed at the mirror head and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element (since as noted magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14 while hall sensor of 30 is on other part to detect mirror drive position, see paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
a camera is disposed at the mirror head and is operable to capture image data exterior of the vehicle for use by a driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as camera module 220, on mirror head 10/210, capture image data for use by vehicle electronic systems, e.g. blind spot monitoring , lane departure/change assist, paragraphs [82-90, 97, 107, 114-116], Figs. 21-24; note that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114);
an electronic control unit (ECU) (i.e. as powerfold system as part of vehicle electronic systems with electronic control module(s), paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-120], Figs. 36-37), wherein the ECU comprises electronic circuitry and associated software (i.e. as such control module(s) include circuits and processors including handling feedback and sensor inputs, signal processing, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37), and wherein the electronic circuitry comprises a data processor for processing sensor data captured by the positioning sensor (i.e. as microprocessor(s) including handling feedback and sensor inputs/data, signal processing of signals of magnetic sensors, Hall effect sensors, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system, based on processing at the ECU of sensor data captured by the positioning sensor, determines a magnetic flux density of a magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (i.e. given the signals of hall effect sensors 28, 30, and signal processing, for feedback, from sensor inputs/data, by processing of signals of magnetic sensors, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37, 9-10, as Hall effect sensors as magnetic sensors sense the change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system, based on processing at the ECU of sensor data captured by the positioning sensor, and based on the determined magnetic flux density of the magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (i.e. given the signals of hall effect sensors 28, 30, feedback from sensor inputs/data, and processing of signals of magnetic sensors, paragraphs [04,51-59,61-71, ,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37, 9-10, as Hall effect sensors as magnetic sensors sense the change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]), determines a rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system is configured to determine the rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base as (i) at the folded position, (ii) at the extended position and (iii) at other positions that is between the folded position and the extended position (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is in drive position, anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]);
wherein based at least in part on the determined rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. vehicle electronic systems) determines one selected from the group consisting of (i) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. given the known/determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head, for use by vehicle electronic systems, i.e. because the camera 220 is mounted on the mirror casing 214 of the mirror head and thus part of exterior rearview mirror assembly, and thus rotates with the mirror head and is positioned with the mirror head, e.g. in the drive position, and anywhere rearward of drive position (towards the park or folded position), see paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36), and (ii) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as the camera position can also be changed between normal/inboard and extended/towing position, and/or alternate mounting position, see Figs. 22, 24, paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117]; where as noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114; Additionally, because the structure of the claimed system, as identified above and in the original action, is the same as that claimed, it must inherently perform the same function as determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board’s finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2114).
Regarding claim 4, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that responsive to determining that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. vehicle electronic systems) operates the electrically-operable actuator to adjust the rotational position of the mirror head until the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as the camera position can also be changed between normal/inboard and extended/towing position and by rotation of mirror head 14 by actuator 18, and depending on the mode and change of camera operation, see Figs. 21-24, paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], where it is noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114).
Regarding claim 5, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head is determined to position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle based at least in part on determination that the mirror head is at the folded position or the extended position (i.e. as best understood, as determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head including folded and extended/use positions, as used by vehicle electronic systems, e.g. paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36) and wherein the determined rotational position of the mirror head is determined to not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle based at least in part on determination that the mirror head is not at the folded position or the extended position (i.e. as best understood, as determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head including between use/drive and folded/park positions, as used by vehicle electronic systems, e.g. paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36; where it is noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114).
Regarding claim 6, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the magnetic element (magnet) is fixed relative to the mounting base (16) and the positioning sensor (30) is disposed at the mirror head (at 14, 10) and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element (since as noted in claim 1 above, magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14 while hall sensor of 30 is on other part to detect mirror drive position, see paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10).
Regarding claim 7, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that as the mirror head is pivoted between the folded position and the extended position, the positioning sensor moves along a path of travel relative to the magnetic element (i.e. due to hall sensor of 30 is on moving/rotating part i.e. mirror head, moving along the rotating path, see paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10).
Regarding claim 8, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the magnetic element is disposed in line with the path of travel of the positioning sensor (i.e. as best understood magnet of 30 is sensed by sensor 30 as 30 moves along path of travel due to rotation of mirror head 14, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 10A-B).
Regarding claim 9, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the magnetic element is disposed offset from the path of travel of the positioning sensor (i.e. as best understood magnet of 30 is near and sensed by sensor 30 as 30 moves along path of travel due to rotation of mirror head 14, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 10A-B).
Regarding claim 10, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that a plane of the magnetic element is one selected from the group consisting of (i) parallel relative to the path of travel of the positioning sensor and (ii) perpendicular relative to the path of travel of the positioning sensor (as best understood, as some plane associated with some aspect or feature of the magnet of 30 sensor can be parallel or perpendicular to the travel path of 30, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 10A-B).
Regarding claim 12, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the positioning sensor is fixed relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element is disposed at the mirror head and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the positioning sensor (e.g. as 28 as hall effect sensor mounted on base 16 with magnet e.g. arc-shaped magnet mounted near arm 16 and rotated with mirror head 10, 14, also as magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10).
Regarding claim 14, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that as the mirror head is pivoted between the folded position and the extended position, the magnetic element moves along a path of travel relative to the positioning sensor (i.e. as the magnet or stamping steep 29 moves along the path of travel along with 14,10 relative to range sensor 28; also equivalent for magnet of sensor 30 moving with 14,10, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10).
Regarding claim 15, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the positioning sensor comprises an inductive sensor disposed at an inductive printed circuit board, and wherein, as the magnetic element moves along the path of travel, the magnetic element moves along the inductive printed circuit board (i.e. as positioning sensor 28, 30 with its PCB board can be magneto-resistive sensor, a magneto-capacitive sensor, a Hall sensor, a magneto-inductive sensor, paragraphs [57-59, 117]).
Regarding claim 16, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the positioning sensor comprises one selected from the group consisting of (i) a magnetic positioning sensor and (ii) an inductive positioning sensor (i.e. as positioning sensor can be magneto-resistive sensor, a magneto-capacitive sensor, a Hall sensor, a magneto-inductive sensor, paragraphs [57-59, 117]).
Regarding claim 18, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that the mirror head accommodates the electrically-operable actuator (i.e. as 14 accommodates 18, paragraphs [49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-4, 7-10).
Regarding claim 19, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that responsive to determining that the determined rotational position of the mirror head is not at the folded position or the extended position, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system operates the electrically-operable actuator to adjust the rotational position of the mirror head until the determined rotational position of the mirror head is at the folded position or the extended position (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system knows/determines the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, and adjusted to folded/park or use/drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sobecki et al. (hereafter Sobecki, of record) US 20140376119 A1.
Regarding claim 13, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) that as the mirror head is pivoted between the folded position and the extended position, the magnetic element rotates about the pivot axis relative to the positioning sensor (as arc-shaped magnet mounted near arm 16 and rotated with mirror head 10, 14, also as magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14, as 14,10 is rotated between folded/park and use/drive positions, paragraphs [51-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 9-10). Sobecki discloses the claimed invention but does not expressly disclose that the positioning sensor and the magnetic element are both disposed along the pivot axis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reverse and arrange the range sensor and its magnet along the pivot axis of mirror head portion, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the working parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955), and In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167 (MPEP §2144.04, sec. VI), and that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The rearrangement in this case does not modify the operation of the device as the position of mirror head with magnet is detectable by magnetic range sensor, and modification still provides positional feedback and "intelligence" into the mirror system in order to correctly move the mirror with minimal assumptions and minimal inputs from the driver (paragraphs 51-52]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sobecki et al. (hereafter Sobecki, of record) US 20140376119 A1 in view of Bartos et al. (hereafter Bartos, of record) US 20100141244 A1.
Regarding claim 11, Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) the magnetic element (magnet of 30) comprises a magnetic scale disposed about the pivot axis, and wherein as the positioning sensor moves along the path of travel the positioning sensor moves along the magnet (i.e. the travel path of 30, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 10A-B), but is silent that magnetic element (magnet of 30) comprises a magnetic scale disposed about the pivot axis.
However, Bartos teaches systems and methods for length and angle measurements with magnetic sensors and probes (see Figs. 1-2,5-6, Abstract, paragraphs [01, 06-18, 40-46]) and further teaches that magnetic element (magnet of 30) comprises a magnetic scale disposed about the pivot axis (i.e. as for angle displacement measurement a circular scales (magnet
wheels) disposed about rotation axis, are advantageously implemented, and detected with magnetic sensor paragraphs {15, 40-46], Figs. 5-6, enabling that value of the magnet wheel scale can be determined unambiguously over a full revolution and with a resolution and accuracy which corresponds to an incremental measurement, and angle position can then be determined with greater measurement accuracy, paragraphs [15,18,41,45-46]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt and modify the drive position sensor and its magnet to include magnet wheel with circular magnetic scale detected by magnetic sensors as taught by Bartos in order to enable that value of the magnet wheel scale can be determined unambiguously over a full revolution and with a resolution and accuracy which corresponds to an incremental measurement, and angle position can then be determined with greater measurement accuracy, paragraphs [15,18,41,45-46]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the Remarks dated 12/04/2025 with respect to claim 1 and its dependent claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specifically, Applicant argues on pages 9-11 that the cited prior art of Sobecki does not disclose amended features of claim 1, namely (1) that based on the determined magnetic flux density of the magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor “the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system is configured to determine the rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base as (i) at the folded position, (ii) at the extended position and (iii) at other positions that is between the folded position and the extended position”, allegedly the rearward range sensor 28 and drive position sensor 30 can only detect whether a magnet is present or not, i.e. the sensors make a binary determination of whether the magnet is present or not; and (2) that determined rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system determines one selected from the group consisting of (i) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle and (ii) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle, because allegedly Sobecki discloses extending and retracting movement of the camera relative to the mirror head, which is unrelated to the claimed rotational position of the mirror head. The examiner respectfully disagrees. With respect to issue (1) and (2) the cited prior art of Sobecki teaches all limitations of claim 1, as Sobecki teaches (see Figs. 1-37) a vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. foldable rearview mirror assembly 10,210 with a powerfold actuator system, and vehicle electronic system(s), see , abstract, paragraphs [02, 03-08, 49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-120], Figs. 1-4, 21-24, 36-37), the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (10 and actuator system) comprising:
an exterior rearview mirror assembly (rearview mirror assembly 10, e.g. paragraphs [49-59,61-71], Figs. 1-4) comprising (i) a mounting base configured for attachment at a side of a vehicle equipped with the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (base 16 for vehicle 11 having 10, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2, 11-12), and (ii) a mirror head pivotable relative to the mounting base about a pivot axis (head portion 14, pivoted about pivot axis, e.g. powerfold mirror, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2, 11-12);
wherein the mirror head comprises a mirror reflective element (reflective element 12, paragraphs [49-59], Figs. 1-2); an electrically-operable actuator (electrically powered actuator 18, paragraphs [49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-4, 7-10), wherein the electrically-operable actuator is electrically operable to adjust the mirror head relative to the mounting base (as 18 adjusts 14 with respect to 16 paragraphs [49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5) between (i) a folded position, where the mirror head is pivoted in toward the side of the vehicle (i.e. as folded or park position of 14m as powerfold mirror 10,14 where the mirror head is pivotable between a drive or use position and folded or park position via actuator 18, abstract, paragraphs [3-4, 49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5),and (ii) an extended position, where the mirror head is pivoted out from the folded position so that the mirror reflective elements provides a rearward view to a driver of the vehicle (i.e. as use or drive position of 10,14, abstract, paragraphs [3-4, 49-59, 61-71], Figs. 1-5);
a positioning sensor and a magnetic element (rearward range sensor 28 with magnet and steel stamping, drive position sensor 30 with magnet, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
wherein the positioning sensor captures sensor data representative of a magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (as 28, 30 as magnetic sensors sense magnetic field of respective magnets, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
wherein one selected from the group consisting of (i) the positioning sensor is fixed relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element is disposed at the mirror head and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the positioning sensor (e.g. as 28 as hall effect sensor mounted on base 16 with magnet e.g. arc-shaped magnet mounted near arm 16 and rotated with mirror head 10, 14, also as magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14, paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10) and (ii) the magnetic element is fixed relative to the mounting base and the positioning sensor is disposed at the mirror head and pivotable with the mirror head relative to the mounting base and the magnetic element (since as noted magnet of 30 disposed in arm 16 or mirror head 14 while hall sensor of 30 is on other part to detect mirror drive position, see paragraphs [57-71], Figs. 9-10);
a camera is disposed at the mirror head and is operable to capture image data exterior of the vehicle for use by a driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as camera module 220, on mirror head 10/210, capture image data for use by vehicle electronic systems, e.g. blind spot monitoring , lane departure/change assist, paragraphs [82-90, 97, 107, 114-116], Figs. 21-24; note that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114);
an electronic control unit (ECU) (i.e. as powerfold system as part of vehicle electronic systems with electronic control module(s), paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-120], Figs. 36-37), wherein the ECU comprises electronic circuitry and associated software (i.e. as such control module(s) include circuits and processors including handling feedback and sensor inputs, signal processing, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37), and wherein the electronic circuitry comprises a data processor for processing sensor data captured by the positioning sensor (i.e. as microprocessor(s) including handling feedback and sensor inputs/data, signal processing of signals of magnetic sensors, Hall effect sensors, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system, based on processing at the ECU of sensor data captured by the positioning sensor, determines a magnetic flux density of a magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (i.e. given the signals of hall effect sensors 28, 30, and signal processing, for feedback, from sensor inputs/data, by processing of signals of magnetic sensors, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,82-83, 95-97,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37, 9-10, as Hall effect sensors as magnetic sensors sense the change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system, based on processing at the ECU of sensor data captured by the positioning sensor, and based on the determined magnetic flux density of the magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor (i.e. given the signals of hall effect sensors 28, 30, feedback from sensor inputs/data, and processing of signals of magnetic sensors, paragraphs [04,51-59,61-71, ,103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37, 9-10, as Hall effect sensors as magnetic sensors sense the change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]), determines a rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]);
wherein the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system is configured to determine the rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base as (i) at the folded position, (ii) at the extended position and (iii) at other positions that is between the folded position and the extended position (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]);
wherein based at least in part on the determined rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. vehicle electronic systems) determines one selected from the group consisting of (i) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. given the known/determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head, for use by vehicle electronic systems, i.e. because the camera 220 is mounted on the mirror casing 214 of the mirror head and thus part of exterior rearview mirror assembly, and thus rotates with the mirror head and is positioned with the mirror head, e.g. in the drive position, and anywhere rearward of drive position (towards the park or folded position), see paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36), and (ii) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as the camera position can also be changed between normal/inboard and extended/towing position, and/or alternate mounting position, see Figs. 22, 24, paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117]; where as noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114).
Specifically, Sobecki teaches the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system, based on processing at the ECU of sensor data captured by the positioning sensor, and based on the determined magnetic flux density of the magnetic field of the magnetic element at the positioning sensor, i.e. given the signals of hall effect sensors 28, 30 and feedback from sensor inputs/data, and processing of signals of magnetic sensors, paragraphs [04,51-59,61-71, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 36-37, 9-10, as Hall effect sensors as magnetic sensors sense the strength and change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]), determines a rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]), and that the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system is configured to determine the rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base as (i) at the folded position, (ii) at the extended position and (iii) at other positions that is between the folded position and the extended position (i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]). Additionally, Hall effect magnetic sensors are magnetic sensors sense the strength and change in magnetic field and magnetic flux density, paragraphs [57-59, 117]. Magnetic field strength is characterized by magnetic field lines which are closed loop lines outlining the local magnetic field. Strength of magnetic field is characterized by density of magnetic field lines or magnetic flux density. Thus magnetic sensors as Hall sensors 28, 30 of Sobecki measure the strength of magnetic field through measurement of the magnetic flux density. A such sensors 28, 30 are not binary sensors as alleged by the Applicant. They measure the magnetic field strength of a probe magnet element which moves towards/away from the sensor based on mirror head rotation, and specifically measure the range of rotation as rearward range sensor. Therefore the mirror powerfold system can determine the rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base as (i) at the folded position, (ii) at the extended position and (iii) at other positions that is between the folded position and the extended position, i.e. given the output of 28, 30 hall sensors system is enabled for knowing, i.e. determining the position of mirror head, so it can be adjusted, as the detected position is anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]. Moreover, if the position and the range of rotation of the mirror is not known, then the powerfold system would not be able to adjusted mirror, which is contrary to the teachings of Sobecki as the system with magnetic sensors detects the mirror position in drive position, anywhere rearward of drive position towards the park or folded position, and away from drive position forward of the drive position, see paragraphs [04,49-59,61-71,103-107, 114-117]).
Moreover, Sobecki teaches that based at least in part on the determined rotational position of the mirror head relative to the mounting base, the vehicular exterior rearview mirror system (e.g. vehicle electronic systems) determines one selected from the group consisting of (i) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle, i.e. given the known/determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head, for use by vehicle electronic systems, i.e. because the camera 220 is mounted on the mirror casing 214 of the mirror head and thus part of exterior rearview mirror assembly, and thus rotates with the mirror head and is positioned with the mirror head, e.g. in the drive position, and anywhere rearward of drive position (towards the park or folded position), see paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36), and (ii) that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does not position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle (i.e. as the camera position can also be changed between normal/inboard and extended/towing position, and/or alternate mounting position, see Figs. 22, 24, paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117]. Specifically, camera /imaging assembly is part of mirror head of the exterior rearview mirror assembly. Thus rotation of mirror head also rotates and determines the position of the camera. The determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle, i.e. given the known/determined position of mirror head, positions the camera 220 on mirror head, for use by vehicle electronic systems, i.e. because the camera 220 is mounted on the mirror casing 214 of the mirror head and thus part of exterior rearview mirror assembly, and thus rotates with the mirror head and is positioned with the mirror head, e.g. in the drive position, and anywhere rearward of drive position (towards the park or folded position), see paragraphs [49-59,61-71,82-90, 103-107, 114-117], Figs. 21, 23,36, see claims 1, 14 and 15). While the camera may include additional retracting mechanism, does not preclude the camera from being mounted on the rotatable/foldable mirror head of the mirror head assembly. Additionally, regarding Applicants statements that the functional limitations regarding determining that the determined rotational position of the mirror head does(or does not) position the camera for capturing image data for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle, are for the purpose as the system itself is required to perform the function of determining that the determined rotational position of the mirror head positions, it is noted that the claim language requires determination of rotational position of the mirror head on which a camera is mounted. On the other hand the determined position is only for use by the driving assistance system of the vehicle. Namely the claim does not recites limitations where exterior rearview mirror system is specifically configured to determine rotational position of the mirror head, camera position and operate to capture or not capture image data and transfer or not transfer image data to the driving assistance system of the vehicle, nor any conditions of what positions allow or don’t allow for image capturing by the camera in the exterior rearview mirror system. Therefore, it was noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Because the prior art device meets all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus it therefore also meets the limitation regarding camera use by driving system for image capture. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). The recitations above of the use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP §2111.04, §2114). Additionally, because the structure of the claimed system, as identified above and in the original action, is the same as that claimed, it must inherently perform the same function as determined rotational position of the mirror head positions the camera. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board’s finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2114).
Therefore, the cited prior art of Sobecki teaches all limitations of claim 1 including the amended features noted under issues (1) and (2) above.
No additional substantial arguments were presented after page 11 of the Remarks dated 12/04/2025.
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 MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights