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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/16/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 12/28/2023 are acknowledged and accepted.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 6/8/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. Claims 1-2 and 6 are amended and Claims 1-6 remain pending in the application.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki (US 20180267304 A1) in view of Yamamoto (US20230103912A1, of record in the IDS dated 12/28/2023).
With respect to Claim 1, Sasaki discloses a head-up display device comprising:
an indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) configured to emit display light (Fig. 1-- element 20 emits light to form element 3; [0031]);
a mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]) rotatable about a rotation shaft (Fig. 1-- element 38, rotation shaft; [0031]) and configured to reflect the display light from the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) to project a display image (Fig. 1-- element 3, display light image; [0031]);
a controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]) configured to control the rotation ([0043]: element 90 controls the rotation of the motor that rotates the mirror) of the mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]); and
a temperature sensor (Fig. 1-- element 70, temperature sensor; [0027]) provided outside a path of the display light (Fig. 1—element 70 is located outside of the beam path) emitted from the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) and configured to output a signal corresponding to an ambient temperature ([0040]: element 70 detects an environmental temperature and outputs a temperature signal) around (Fig. 1—element 70 takes the ambient temperature of the same space occupied by element 20) the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]).
However, Sasaki does not explicitly disclose wherein an indicator dimmed by duty ratio control;
a controller configured to control the duty ratio;
the controller is configured to:
use on both of the duty ratio of the indicator and the signal from the temperature sensor to determine a predicted temperature of the indicator, and
execute, as failure avoidance control, lowering control for lowering an upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator or rotation control of the mirror member for reducing the amount of sunlight that enters the indicator through the mirror member when the predicted temperature of the indicator is greater than or equal to a threshold, and wherein
when the predicted temperature of the indicator is greater than or equal to the threshold, the controller is configured to lower the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator as the predicted temperature of the indicator increases.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein an indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) dimmed by duty ratio control ([0069]: the light source 65 is controlled by a PWM duty ratio);
a controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) configured to control the duty ratio ([0061]: the protection processor 75 of FIG. 5 limits the maximum value of the PWM duty ratio via the light source adjuster 30);
the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured to:
use both of the duty ratio of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) and the signal from the temperature sensor (Fig. 3—element 52, temperature sensor; [0038]) to determine a predicted temperature of the indicator ([0060]: a temperature of the display panel 64 in a steady state is determined by luminance L of the light source 65, which is correlated to the PWM duty ratio, and the ambient temperature Ta), and
execute, as failure avoidance control, lowering control for lowering the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator or rotation control of the mirror member (Fig. 3-- element M1, reflection mirror; [0035]) for reducing the amount of sunlight that enters the indicator through the mirror member (Fig. 3-- element M1, reflection mirror; [0035]) when the predicted temperature of the indicator is greater than or equal to a threshold ([0061]: when the temperature of element 64 reaches above the protection start temperature, element 67 rotates the position of element M1 to lower the amount of sunlight allowed to reach element 64), and wherein
when the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) is greater than or equal to the threshold ([0061]: when element 64 reaches the protection start temperature, protective mode is initiated), the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured to lower the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) as the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) increases ([0069]: the protection processor 75 of FIG. 5 limits the maximum value of the PWM duty ratio via the light source adjuster 30 in protective mode).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the temperature monitoring a protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
With respect to Claim 2, Sasaki and Yamamoto discloses the head-up display device according to claim 1, and Sasaki further discloses the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) and wherein the controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]) is configured to rotate the mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]) to a first rotation angle ([0045]: element 92 controls the rotation of element 32 in response to the ambient temperature) at which the amount of sunlight that enters the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) through the mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]) is less than or equal to a predetermined amount of light ([0045]: element 92b stores programs in a memory to rotate the motor shaft of the mirror in response to the ambient temperature, including from heat from ambient light entering the window 14).
However, Sasaki does not further disclose wherein
when the predicted temperature of the is greater than or equal to a specified value exceeding the threshold, the controller is configured to:
lower the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator to zero to turn off the indicator.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein
when the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) is greater than or equal to a specified value exceeding the threshold ([0061]: when element 64 reaches the protection start temperature, protective mode is initiated), the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured:
to lower the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) to zero ([0061]: the driving of the light source is turned off in protective move) to turn off the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
With respect to Claim 3, Sasaki and Yamamoto disclose the head-up display device according to claim 2, Sasaki further discloses the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]), the mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]) is rotated to the first rotation angle ([0045]: element 92 controls the rotation of element 32 in response to the ambient temperature), the controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]) is configured to execute restriction release control, which is lighting control for lighting ([0045]: element 92b stores programs in a memory to rotate the motor shaft of the mirror in response to the ambient temperature, including from heat from ambient light entering the window 14) the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) or return control for returning the mirror member (Fig. 1-- element 32, mirror; [0031]) to a second rotation angle before the first rotation angle is set.
However, Sasaki does not further disclose wherein when the predicted temperature of the indicator is less than the specified value from the state in which the predicted temperature of the indicator is greater than or equal to the specified value, and the indicator is turned off.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein when the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) is less than the specified value from the state in which the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) is greater than or equal to the specified value, and the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) is turned off ([0061]: the driving of the light source is turned off in protective move).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
With respect to Claim 4, Sasaki and Yamamoto disclose the head-up display device according to claim 3, Sasaki further discloses the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]) and the controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]).
However, Sasaki does not explicitly disclose when the lighting control is executed, the controller in configured to increase the upper limit of the duty ratio of the indicator as the predicted temperature of the decreases.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein
when the lighting control is executed, the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured to increase the upper limit of the duty ratio ([0065]: [0065]: the light source 65 is driven in a state where the maximum luminance Lmax is limited to a value lower than that in the normal mode MN) of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) as the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) decreases.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
With respect to Claim 5, Sasaki and Yamamoto discloses the head-up display device according to claim 1, and Sasaki further discloses the controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]), the indicator (Fig. 1-- element 20, projector; [0029]), and the temperature sensor (Fig. 1-- element 70, temperature sensor; [0027]).
However, Sasaki does not further disclose wherein
the controller is configured to determine the predicted temperature of the indicator based on both of the ambient temperature detected by the temperature sensor and a heat generation amount, the heat generation amount is based on both of the duty ratio and a lighting time of the indicator.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein
the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured to determine the predicted temperature of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) based on both of the ambient temperature ([0060]: a temperature of the display panel 64 is determined by the ambient temperature Ta) detected by the temperature sensor (Fig. 3—element 52, temperature sensor; [0038]) and a heat generation amount ([0060]: a temperature of the display panel 64 in a steady state is determined by luminance L of the light source 65), the heat generation amount ([0060]: a temperature of the display panel 64 in a steady state is determined by luminance L of the light source 65) is based on both of the duty ratio ([0069]: the luminance of the light source 65 is controlled by a PWM duty ratio) of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the heat generation amount is based on a lighting time.
It has been held that to reject a claim under a rationale of choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, Office personnel must resolve the Graham factual inquiries. Then, Office personnel must articulate the following:
(1) a finding that at the time of the invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art, which may include a design need or market pressure to solve a problem;
(2) a finding that there had been a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem;
(3) a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success; and
(4) whatever additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries may be necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness.
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that "a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. If any of these findings cannot be made, then this rationale cannot be used to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP §2143(I)(E).
In the instant case (1) at the time of the invention, there was a recognized need in the art to create HUD devices which can utilize protective operations to avoid becoming overheated by various sources (2) there are a finite number of sources within a HUD device which radiate heat while the device is operating (3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued any of these solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (4) the Graham factual inquiries have been explained above.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose to take the lighting time of the display into account when making heat generation calculations because it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success is within ordinary skill.
With respect to Claim 6, Sasaki and Yamamoto discloses the head-up display device according to claim 1, and Sasaki further discloses the controller (Fig. 1-- element 90, control unit; [0027]). However, Sasaki does not disclose
wherein the controller is configured to:
use the duty ratio of the indicator to select the temperature rise value;
determine the predicted temperature by adding the temperature rise value to the ambient temperature.
Sasaki and Yamamoto are related as both pertaining to the field of HUD devices. Yamamoto does disclose wherein
the controller (Fig. 5—element 75, protection processor; [0061]) is configured to:
use the duty ratio of the indicator (Fig. 3—element 65, light source; [0069]) to select the temperature rise value ([0063]: a temperature rise amount ΔT corresponds to the luminance L of the light source 65; [0066]: protection processor 75 determines the maximum luminance so that an addition result of the temperature rise amount ΔT (L) and the ambient temperature Ta becomes constant);
determine the predicted temperature by adding the temperature rise value ([0063]: a temperature rise amount ΔT corresponds to the luminance L of the light source 65) to the ambient temperature ([0060]: a temperature of the display panel 64 is determined by the ambient temperature Ta) ([0063]: the temperature of the display panel 64 when the sunlight is not incident is estimated by adding the temperature rise amount ΔT (L) and the ambient temperature Ta).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the head-up display device of Sasaki with the protective operations of Yamamoto in order to create a device capable of preventing the intrusion of external light and thus damage to the display unit (Yamamoto, [0002]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACKENZI BOURQUINE whose telephone number is (571)272-5956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 4:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/MACKENZI BOURQUINE/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights