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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2010064708 A (KANAMORI NAOTO) machine translation.
PNG
media_image1.png
332
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
194
224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
156
186
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
238
282
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
192
198
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Per claim 1, Kanamori teaches a virtual image display [10] apparatus comprising: a housing [11], wherein: the virtual image display apparatus is configured to emit display light towards a projection member of a vehicle to allow a viewer to visually recognize the display light as a virtual image reflected by the projection member [a display light production unit 30]; the housing includes a first housing part located on a side of the housing facing in a first direction [12 located towards the bottom side and thus facing the bottom], and a second housing part located on a side of the housing facing in a second direction being opposite to the first direction [21 located towards the top side and thus facing the top], and a composite wall located on a side of the housing facing in a third direction being perpendicular to the first direction [first housing 12’s vertical wall], the composite wall including a first wall portion and a second wall portion [vertical wall of 12 and 21], the first wall portion extending from the first housing part, the second wall portion extending from the second housing part [see figure 4]; and the first wall portion and the second wall portion have an interference avoidance structure that is configured to avoid interference when the first wall portion and the second wall portion approach each other by receiving a load [the top portion of the first composite wall and the bottom portion of the second wall do not overlap, thus preventing interference under load], and the housing is open on the composite wall [engaging hole 201].
Per claim 2, Kanamori teaches the virtual image display apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the interference avoidance structure is a structure in which the first wall portion and the second wall portion are at different positions in a thickness direction of the first wall portion and the second wall portion [see figure 4].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2010064708 A (KANAMORI NAOTO) in view of US 20180129125 A1 (CHEN; Stephen).
PNG
media_image6.png
400
510
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Per claim 3, Kanamori teaches the virtual image display apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein: the first wall portion has a tip facing in the second direction [top portion of the composite wall], and the second wall portion has a tip facing in the first direction [bottom portion of the second composite wall]; but lacks the interference avoidance structure is a structure in which at least one of the tip of the first wall portion or the tip of the second wall portion has a tilted surface. However, Chen teaches a tip [vertical slanted portion of cover 1] portion of the first wall portion. See Chen’s figure 3 cover 1. The expected benefit would have been a more compact design. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Chen with Kanjamori.
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2010064708 A (KANAMORI NAOTO).
Per claim 8, Kanamori teaches the virtual image display apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the second housing part is located above the first housing part [see figure 4], but lacks the virtual image display apparatus comprising: a rib extending from a top portion having an upper surface of the second housing part to the second wall portion. However, it was common knowledge to add a rib extending from a top portion having an upper surface of the second housing part to the second wall portion in order to increase structural rigidity. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 16, Kanamori teaches the virtual image display apparatus according to claim 1, but lacks the housing open on the composite wall includes an unimpeded opening on the composite wall. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in the art to incorporate additional unimpeded openings in the composite wall in order to dissipate heat generated by the display. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 are allowed.
Claims 4-7 and 9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Per claims 4-7 and 9, the prior art teaches the virtual image display apparatus according to Claim 1. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach a reflection mirror located inside the housing, the reflection mirror reflecting the display light towards the projection member; and at least one fastening portion fastening the first housing part and the second housing part, wherein: the composite wall faces in a frontward direction of the vehicle; and a rotation shaft of the reflection mirror is located between the at least one fastening portion and the composite wall without any member fastening the first housing part and the second housing part between the composite wall and the rotation shaft.
In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach a reflection mirror located inside the housing, the reflection mirror reflecting the display light towards the projection member, wherein: the second housing part is located above the first housing part; and the first wall portion has a tip facing in the second direction, and the tip is located below a height position of a rotation shaft of the reflection mirror.
In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach one or a plurality of fastening portions fastening the first housing part and the second housing part; and at least one fastening portion fastening the first housing part and the second housing part, wherein: the composite wall faces in a frontward direction of the vehicle; the at least one fastening portion includes a frontmost fastening portion located at a position frontmost among the at least one fastening portion in the frontward direction; and the interference avoidance structure extends in an entire region of the composite wall on a front side of the frontmost fastening portion.
In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach the second wall portion separates away from a plane on which the first wall portion is located in a direction toward a tip of the second wall portion facing in the first direction.
In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach the first wall portion has a tip facing in the second direction, and the second wall portion has a tip facing in the first direction; and a distance between the tip of the first wall portion and the tip of the second wall portion is smaller than 3 millimeters, in a case where the tip of the first wall portion and the tip of the second wall portion do not overlap each other in the first direction.
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/4/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Kanamori anticipates an opening in the composite wall. See Kanamori’s figure 7, opening 201. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights