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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/09/2026 are moot because they are directed toward the newly added claim limitations regarding the amended claim language directed the display being on a back of a vehicle seat and movable towards and away from the seat. The newly added claim limitations overcome the previous rejection. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection, necessitated by the amendment, is made in view of reference US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara et al.).
The Examiner notes that Kuwabara teaches that the display may be mounted on the back of a seat (see at least Fig 4). Furthermore Hackenberg states that the display device may be “in the rear area of a motor vehicle, for example as a display device for a rear seat entertainment system”.
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.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0190373 (Fontana) in view of DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.) and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara).
With respect to claim 1
Fontana teaches: An electronic device (see at least Fig 1; #100; and ¶0008 and ¶0055), disposed on a vehicle body (see at least Fig 1; #10; and ¶0055, comprising:
a display (see at least Fig 2-5; 18 and 18a; and ¶0006 and ¶0040;
a modulation unit (#34), through which the display (#18a) being connected to the vehicle body (see at least Fig 2-5; 34-42; and ¶0037; discussing the device 34-40 connects the display #18a to part of the vehicle body #42); and
a control unit (#102), electrically connected to the modulation unit (see at least Fig 1; #34 and #102; and ¶0055), wherein the control unit (#102) controls the modulation unit (#34) to adjust a fixed state of the display (see at least Fig 1-5; and #34-42 and #102; and ¶0035 and ¶0055; Discussing moving surface #18, which the display #18a is attached to, in response to notification from a crash sensor.).
Fontan does not specifically teach:
the electronic device disposed on a back of a vehicle seat;
adjust a fixed state of the display by moving the display between a retracted position adjacent to the vehicle seat and an extended position away from the vehicle seat toward a passenger; and
wherein the modulation unit is configured to memorize a last position of the display device for subsequent use.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed with a reasonable expectation of success to saving a vehicles display devices location/orientation. Specifically Hackenberg teaches:
wherein the modulation unit is configured to memorize a last position of the display device for subsequent use (see at least Fig 1; #10; and pg. 6; “ the display device can be operated in a setting mode in which a vehicle occupant can change the inclination of the display device manually - for example via a switch or via a displayed menu of the display device - and then save it in a desired position of use”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the movable vehicle display disclosed in Fontana with a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the system to be personalized for a user (see Hackenberg pg. 6). Thus making the system easier to use.
the combination of Fontana and Hackenberg does not teach that the system is in the back of a seat and therefore does not specifically teach:
the electronic device disposed on a back of a vehicle seat; and
adjust a fixed state of the display by moving the display between a retracted position adjacent to the vehicle seat and an extended position away from the vehicle seat toward a passenger.
However the Examiner contends having the electronic device attached to the back of the seat would have been an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed with a reasonable expectation of success. Specifically Kuwabara teaches:
the electronic device disposed on a back of a vehicle seat (see at least Fig 2; #4; and ¶0036-37); and
adjust a fixed state of the display by moving the display between a retracted position adjacent to the vehicle seat and an extended position away from the vehicle seat toward a passenger (see at least Fig 3, 5, 7, and 9; #4, #32, and #33; and ¶0040-41, ¶0045, ¶0050, and ¶0052; Discussing the display moving towards and away from the seat).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana and a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, with the vehicle mounting display on the back of a vehicle seat as taught in Kuwabara with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the controller to control the movement of the display (see ¶0043).
With respect to claim 2
Fontana teaches:
wherein the modulation unit comprises at least one connecting rod (see at least Fig 2-5; #34-42; and ¶0026, ¶0037, and ¶0041; The Examiner notes when read in light of the specification (Fig 1a-2b and claim 3) the connecting rod could have multiple elements.), and one end of the at least one connecting rod is connected to the display (see at least Fig 2-5; #18, #18a, and #34-42; and ¶0026, ¶0037, and ¶0041), and the other end of the at least one connecting rod is connected to the vehicle body (see at least Fig 2-5; #34-42; and ¶0026, ¶0037, and ¶0041; see above regarding attached to vehicle seat.).
With respect to claim 3
Fontana teaches:
wherein the at least one connecting rod comprises at least one single rod, at least one double connecting rod, at least one single-axis connecting rod or at least one multi-axis connecting rod (see at least Fig 2-5; #34-42; and ¶0026, ¶0037, and ¶0041; The Examiner notes that only one of these elements is needed to be part of the connecting rod.).
With respect to claim 4
Fontana does not teach:
wherein the modulation unit comprises an electromagnetic structure, and the control unit is configured to regulate an amount of energy output by the electromagnetic structure.
However Kuwabara teaches:
wherein the modulation unit (#3) comprises an electromagnetic structure (see at least Fig 3; #51-54; and ¶0042 and ¶0043), and the control unit (#2) is configured to regulate an amount of energy output by the electromagnetic structure (see at least Fig 1 and 3; #2 and #51-54; and ¶0009-10 and ¶0043).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana and a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, with the vehicle mounting display using an electromagnetic coil as taught in Kuwabara with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the controller to control the movement of the display (see ¶0043).
With respect to claim 5
Fontana teaches:
at least one buffer member (see at least Fig 2-9; #30 and #32; ¶0032-34), disposed on the vehicle body (see at least Fig 2-9; #10, #30, and #32; ¶0032-34; See above regarding vehicle seat.), wherein the at least one buffer member is adjacent to the modulation unit (see at least Fig 2-9; #30 and #32; ¶0032-34), or the at least one buffer member is adjacent to the display (see at least Fig 2-9; #30 and #32; ¶0032-34; Showing an airbag placed near the actuator and the display).
With respect to claim 6
Fontana teaches:
wherein the at least one buffer member comprises at least one airbag (see at least Fig 2-9; #30 and #32; ¶0032-34).
With respect to claim 7
Fontana teaches:
at least one sensing module (see at least Fig 1; #104; and ¶0055), electrically connected to the control unit (see at least Fig 1; #102 and #104; and ¶0055) and configured to output at least one sensing signal (see at least Fig 1; #104 and #110; and ¶0055), and the control unit controlling the modulation unit according to the at least one sensing signal (see at least Fig 1; #34, #102, #104, and #110; and ¶0055; Discussing controlling the position of the display is altered based on a crash sensor.).
With respect to claim 8
Fontana does not teach:
wherein the at least one sensing module comprises at least one infrared ranging, at least one memory motor rotation number, at least one pressure sensing or at least one force sensing.
However Kuwabara teaches:
wherein the at least one sensing module comprises at least one infrared ranging, at least one memory motor rotation number, at least one pressure sensing or at least one force sensing (see at least Fig 13; #1; and ¶0066; Discussing that the instead of detecting acceleration a piezoelectric sensor can be used to determine a person’s posture.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana and a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, with the vehicle mounting display that uses a pressure sensor to detect a person’s posture as taught in Kuwabara with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the system to determine the posture of a passenger and adjust the display accordingly (see Kuwabara ¶0066).
With respect to claim 10
Fontana teaches:
wherein the vehicle body comprises at least one fixed structure (see at least Fig 2-9; #42; and ¶0037), and the display (18 and #18a) is fixed to the vehicle body through the at least one fixed structure (see at least Fig 2-9; #42; and ¶0037).
With respect to claim 12
Fontana does not specifically teach:
wherein the vehicle body comprises at least one groove, and the display is partially accommodated in the at least one groove.
However Kuwabara teaches:
wherein the vehicle body comprises at least one groove (see at least Fig 10; #31; and ¶0053), and the display (#4) is partially accommodated in the at least one groove (see at least Fig 10; #31; and ¶0053).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana and a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, with the vehicle mounting display that has a groove to accommodate a display as taught in Kuwabara with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the display to slidable move (see Kuwabara ¶0053).
With respect to claim 13
Fontana teaches
a drive unit, electrically connected to the control unit and configured to send a drive signal to the control unit (see at least ¶0045 and ¶0053; Discussing a user actuatable input to control the screen position.).
With respect to claim 15
Fontana teaches:
a power supply, supplying power and electrically connected to the control unit, wherein the control unit comprises a control circuit and a drive circuit that are electrically connected to each other (see at least Fig 1; #100 and #102; and ¶0055 and ¶0064; Discussing using a controller that is an electrical circuit, and therefore would have a power supply connected and a circuit to send signals to the actuator (drive circuit)) .
With respect to claim 17
Fontana teaches:
wherein the fixed state comprises a first fixed position and a second fixed position (see at least Fig 2-9; #18a and ¶0040-51), and the first fixed position and the second fixed position are different (see at least Fig 2-9; #18a and ¶0040-51).
With respect to claim 20
Fontana does not teach:
wherein the modulation unit has a hook, the display has a slot, and the hook withdraws from the slot for the display being taken out
However Kuwabara teaches:
wherein the modulation unit has a hook, the display has a slot, and the hook withdraws from the slot for the display being taken out (see at least Fig 5(a-e); #51 and 52; and ¶045-47);
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana and a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, with the vehicle mounting display that has a groove to accommodate a display as taught in Kuwabara with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the display to slidable move (see Kuwabara ¶0053).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US 2024/0190373 (Fontana), DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.), and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of US 2022/0317767 (Zhang et la.).
With respect to claim 9
The combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the at least one sensing module and the modulation unit are disposed at the same position.
However Zhang teaches:
wherein the at least one sensing module and the modulation unit are disposed at the same position (see at least Fig 1 and 2; #202 and #221; and ¶0098-102).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that uses a camera on the vehicle mounted display as taught in Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the system to determine the gaze of a passenger and adjust the display accordingly (see Zhang ¶0097-100).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US 2024/0190373 (Fontana), DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.), and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of US 2021/0023949 (Marietta et al.).
With respect to claim 11
the combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the at least one fixed structure comprises at least one latch that engages with a slot on the display and fixes the display to the vehicle body.
Marietta teaches:
wherein the at least one fixed structure comprises at least one latch (see at least Fig 6; #66; ¶0045) that engages with a slot on the display and fixes the display to the vehicle body (see at least Fig 6; #38 and #66; ¶0045).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that uses a latching mechanism as taught in Marietta with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the display to be locked in place and released (see Marietta ¶0045)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US 2024/0190373 (Fontana), DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.), and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of US 2019/0193644 (Amano et al.).
With respect to claim 14
The combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the drive unit comprises a button.
However Amano teaches:
wherein the drive unit comprises a button (see at least Fig 1-3; #28, #70, #70U, and #70L; and ¶0054-56; Discussing using a pushbutton to control the position of the screen.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that uses a pushbutton to control the display position as taught in Amano with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the user to easily change the position of the display (see Amano ¶0054-56).
Claim 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US 2024/0190373 (Fontana) DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.), and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2008/0068848 (Kim).
With respect to claim 16
The combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the fixed state comprises a first fixed strength and a second fixed strength, and the first fixed strength and the second fixed strength are different.
However Kim teaches:
wherein the fixed state comprises a first fixed strength and a second fixed strength (see at least Fig 1-7; #15, #27, and #29; ¶0018, ¶0019, and ¶0043-49; Discussing a force to help the gearbox ascend), and the first fixed strength and the second fixed strength are different (see at least Fig 1-7; #15, #27, and #29; ¶0018, ¶0019, and ¶0043-49; Discussing decreasing the applied pressure when closing the monitor.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that has different forces/strengths at different positions as taught in Kim with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the user to easily open and close the display or move the display to the desired position (see Kim ¶0043-49).
With respect to claim 19
The combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the modulation unit comprises a crank rod.
However Kim teaches:
wherein the modulation unit comprises a crank rod (see at least Fig 1-7; #22; and ¶0018 and ¶0038-39).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that has guide/crank rod as taught in Kim with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the user to easily open and close the display or move the display to the desired position (see Kim ¶0043-49).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US 2024/0190373 (Fontana), DE 102014016323 (Hackenberg et al.), and US 2008/0010875 (Kuwabara), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 214412417 (Zhang)
With respect to claim 18
The combination of Fontana, Hackenberg, and Kuwabara does not specifically teach:
wherein the vehicle body comprises a charging coil, which electrically connects the vehicle body and the display.
However Zhang teaches:
wherein the vehicle body comprises a charging coil, which electrically connects the vehicle body and the display (stating “As shown in FIG. 1-4, display a vehicle-mounted bracket automatically aligned charging coil 1000. the automatic alignment charging coil of the vehicle-mounted bracket 1000 comprises: shell 100; an induction charging emitting device 200 for wirelessly charging the portable device; a clamping assembly 300 for clamping the portable device from the left and right sides and the lower side of the portable device;”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the vehicle display mounting device disclosed in Fontana, a vehicle display device that remembers a set position taught in Hackenberg, and the vehicle mounting display on the back of a seat as taught in Kuwabara, with the vehicle mounting display that has different a charging coil as taught in Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success, because doing so would allow the display to properly charge (see Zhang Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL F WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7747. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Peter Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
MICHAEL F. WHALEN
Examiner
Art Unit 3661
/M.F.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661