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 .
This office action is in response to RCE filed 02/26/2026 in which claims 1-20 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-14, filed 02/26/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims have been fully considered and amended claim 1 is moot in view of new grounds of rejection by relying on the teachings of Raz et al. (US 2024/0264717 A1).
Arguments with respect to claims 7-8 have been fully considered and are persuasive, hence Claims 7-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Arguments with respect to claim 19 are persuasive and amended Claim 19 has allowable subject matter (as described below), hence claim 19 is now allowable. Claim 20 depends on claim 19 hence it is also allowable.
Arguments with respect to claims 9 -11 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Claims 9 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson in view of Tanaka and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0038732 to Waite et al. (hereinafter, "Waite"). The rejection is respectfully traversed. As an initial matter, claims 9 and 10 depend from claim 1, and, therefore, these claims are allowable for at least the reasons provided in support of claim 1. The further teachings of Waite do not overcome the deficiencies of the prior art as applied to claim 1. Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejections to claims 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. §103 is respectfully requested.
In addition, claim 10 recites, in part, "a plurality of landmarks spaced from one another," "determine a first angle between the imaging device and one of the plurality of landmarks and a second angle between the imaging device and a different one of the plurality of landmarks," and "average or weigh the first angle and the second angle to determine the current orientation of the imaging device relative to the plurality of landmarks based on the first and second angles and the depth of the associated landmarks." Waite appears to be generally silent as to the identification of landmarks and determination of angles between the landmarks, much less two the utilization of two landmarks. More particularly, Waite is, at most, directed to using one or more images of an occupant's head (i.e., not landmarks) for occupant positional monitoring (i.e., not orientation of the mirror). Waite is also silent as to averaging or weighing the first angle and the second angle to determine the current orientation of the imaging device relative to the plurality of landmarks based on the first and second angles and the depth of the associated landmarks. As such, claim 10 is allowable for at least this additional reason.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and clarifies that Waite discloses in Para[0018] Referring to FIGS. 1-5, the tracking device 16 is an apparatus configured to capture the first video image 24 in a predefined area in the vehicle 12 and provide the first video image signal 26 which may be encoded with data of the first video image 24. The predefined area may be the area where the driver 14 sits while driving. The predefined area may be large enough where the first video image 24 may include the head of the driver 14 and additional area around the head of the driver 14 to account for movement of the head of the driver 14. Para[0022] teaches tracking device 16 may comprise a plurality of video cameras. When two or more physically separated video cameras view a scene from different angles, the data from the two images may be compared to obtain 3-D location data of the position of the head and/or eyes of the driver 14 using stereoscopic image techniques as known to those with skill in the art. para[0033] the rearview mirror 50 may be rotated so that the optical axis of the first field of view 36 of the driver 14 after reflecting off the rearview mirror 50 may be directed rearward substantially parallel to the x-axis. The orientation of the rearview mirror 50 may be detected by sensors (not shown) and sent to the processing device 20. Para[0038] teaches when the head position of the driver 14 moves (driver 14.sub.1 having a first head position and driver 14.sub.2 having a second head position), the angle .alpha. may change).Para[0045] teaches In step 108, the processing device 20 may determine the first field of view 36 of the driver 14 based on the head position and/or eye positions of the driver 14 already determined by the processing device 20 in step 106. In accordance with an embodiment of the invention, the processing device 20 may identify a desirable second field of view 52 of the rear-facing camera 18 and may output position data for the rear-facing camera 18 based on the desirable second field of view 52.
Thus predefined area, head position and/or eye positions in Waite can be interpreted as landmarks because the orientation of the rearview mirror is detected based on the field of view’s based on the these.
Hence rejections to claims 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. §103 is maintained.
Applicant further argues that Claims 11, 12, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson in view of Waite.
Regarding claim 11, the cited references do not disclose, teach, or suggest each and every element in the claimed invention as recited. More particularly, claim 19 recites, in part, "a processor configured to extrapolate angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks," "extrapolate a depth of the at least two landmarks in three dimensional space," and "extrapolate a current orientation out of the plurality of orientations of the imaging device based on a weighted average of the angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks and the depth of the at least two landmarks." As explained in reference to claim 10 above, Waite is, at most, directed to using one or more images of an occupant's head (i.e., not landmarks) for occupant positional monitoring (i.e., not orientation of the mirror). Waite is also silent as to averaging or weighing the first angle and the second angle to determine the current orientation of the imaging device relative to the plurality of landmarks based on the first and second angles and the depth of the associated landmarks. As such, claim 11 is allowable for at least this additional reason.
Claims 12-18 depend from claim 11, and, therefore, these claims are allowable for at least the reasons provided in support of claim 11. Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejections to claims 12, 15 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. §103 is respectfully requested.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and clarifies that Waite discloses in Para[0018] Referring to FIGS. 1-5, the tracking device 16 is an apparatus configured to capture the first video image 24 in a predefined area in the vehicle 12 and provide the first video image signal 26 which may be encoded with data of the first video image 24. The predefined area may be the area where the driver 14 sits while driving. The predefined area may be large enough where the first video image 24 may include the head of the driver 14 and additional area around the head of the driver 14 to account for movement of the head of the driver 14. Para[0022] teaches tracking device 16 may comprise a plurality of video cameras. When two or more physically separated video cameras view a scene from different angles, the data from the two images may be compared to obtain 3-D location data of the position of the head and/or eyes of the driver 14 using stereoscopic image techniques as known to those with skill in the art. para[0033] the rearview mirror 50 may be rotated so that the optical axis of the first field of view 36 of the driver 14 after reflecting off the rearview mirror 50 may be directed rearward substantially parallel to the x-axis. The orientation of the rearview mirror 50 may be detected by sensors (not shown) and sent to the processing device 20. Para[0038] teaches when the head position of the driver 14 moves (driver 14.sub.1 having a first head position and driver 14.sub.2 having a second head position), the angle .alpha. may change). para [0045] In step 108, the processing device 20 may determine the first field of view 36 of the driver 14 based on the head position and/or eye positions of the driver 14 already determined by the processing device 20 in step 106. In accordance with an embodiment of the invention, the processing device 20 may identify a desirable second field of view 52 of the rear-facing camera 18 and may output position data for the rear-facing camera 18 based on the desirable second field of view 52.
Thus predefined area, head position and/or eye positions in Waite can be interpreted as landmarks because the orientation of the rearview mirror may be detected based on the field of view’s based on the head position of the driver.
Thus Claims 11, 12, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson in view of Waite., and, therefore, these claims are not allowable for at least the reasons provided above.
Applicant further argues as an initial matter, claims 13, 14, 17 and 18 depend from claim 11, and, therefore, these claims are allowable for at least the reasons provided in support of claim 11. The further teachings of Tanaka fail to overcome the deficiencies of Peterson and Waite. Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejections to claims 13, 14, 17 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. §103 is respectfully requested.
As it further relates to claim 13, it recites, in part, "further including an imprint physically added specifically as landmark in the vehicle containing the rearview mirror assembly to detect the current orientation in a roll direction." As explained previously, the prior art as cited is silent as to a utilization of an imprint physically added specifically as landmark. As such, claim 13 is allowable for at least this additional reason. Para[0035] teaches the position detection unit 11 outputs structure image position information indicating the structure image position to the deviation amount calculation unit 12, where the scanning position at the minimum SAD (is the structure image position, which is the position of the captured image GP. Furthermore, the position detection unit 11 outputs the amount of rotation of the reference image when the minimum SAD is calculated to the deviation amount calculation unit 12 as the deviation amount Δφ<sub>ｒｏｌｌ</sub> in the rotation direction of the imaging device 1).
Arguments with respect to claims 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive, hence Claims 13 is 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. Claim 18 recites the same subject matter as objected claims 8, hence claim 18 is also 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 19-20
A monitoring system comprising an illumination source is configured to emit at least one of the light spot including a rotation dependent feature that includes a tail, to identify the at least one light spot in the image and utilize the tail of the at least one light spot as a landmark to determine a current degree of rotation of the imaging device based on the position of the rotation dependent feature in the image.
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.
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 1-6, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Peterson et al. (US 2023/0017715 A1) (IDS provided 06/14/2024) in view of Raz et al. (US 2024/0264717 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Peterson discloses a monitoring system comprising: a rearview mirror assembly (para[0030] & Fig. 1 teaches an interior rearview mirror assembly 10 for a vehicle) including a mounting member (para[0030] teaches mirror assembly 10 is configured to be adjustably mounted to an interior portion of a vehicle (such as to an interior or in-cabin surface of a vehicle windshield or a headliner of a vehicle or the like) via a mounting structure or mounting configuration or assembly 16) and a housing (casing 12) that articulates relative to the mounting member (fig. 2, 16); an imaging device located in and fixed relative to the housing (para[0031] & FIGS. 3-6 and 8-10 teaches the mirror assembly includes a driver monitoring system (DMS) comprising a driver monitoring camera 18 disposed at a back plate 20) and moveable with the housing (casing 12) between a plurality of orientations (Abstract teaches camera accommodated by mirror head to move in tandem with the mirror head when the mirror head is adjusted relative to the mounting base to adjust a driver's rearward view. para[0040], [0044], [0051] & figs.11, 19-22), the imaging device configured to capture a image of an occupant’s location (para[0031] teaches the driver monitoring system includes the driver monitoring camera and may also include an occupant monitoring camera), and a processor configured to: identify at least one landmark in the image(para[0040] teaches thus the driver monitoring system determines the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data (see FIGS. 11 and 12));
Peterson does not explicitly disclose and a processor configured to: configured identify that the housing has been articulated relative to the mounting member ;in response, identify at least one landmark in the sequence of images; view the sequence of images to determine a shift in a location of the at least one landmark in a vertical direction or a horizontal direction; and extrapolate a current orientation out of the plurality of orientations of the imaging device based on the shift in location of the at least one landmark in the sequence of images. However Raz discloses and a processor configured to: identify that the housing has been articulated relative to the mounting member (Para[0069] teaches at least one image type includes a first image type from a first orientation and a shifted image type from a second orientation); in response, identify at least one landmark in the sequence of images; view the sequence of images to determine a shift in a location of the at least one landmark in a vertical direction or a horizontal direction (Para[0045] & Fig. 9 teaches control system 100 (e.g., the processor 104) may be configured to extract first and second orientations of the 2D representation 31 in accordance with the locations in the first image type 28 and the shifted image type 80 of the body parts of the at least one vehicle occupant 18A-18D); and extrapolate a current orientation out of the plurality of orientations of the imaging device based on the shift in location of the at least one landmark in the sequence of images (Para[0045] & Fig. 9 teaches the control system 100 (e.g., the processor 104) may be configured to extract first and second orientations of the 2D representation 31 in accordance with the locations in the first image type 28 and the shifted image type 80 of the body parts of the at least one vehicle occupant 18A-18D. More particularly, under the principles of stereovision, the control system 100 (e.g., the processor 104) may be configured to obtain depth information of the 2D representation 31 by measuring the position of the 2D representation 31 in the first image type 28 against the position of the 2D representation 31 in the shifted image type 80 along epipolar lines). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the invention to use the method of that adjusts processing of image data captured by driver monitoring camera by taking into account of an adjustment of mirror head when driver adjusts mirror head for vision to adjust at rear view of driver of Peterson with the first image type from a first orientation and a shifted image type from a second orientation. A 3D representation of a vehicle occupant is obtained by stereovision of Raz in order to provide depth information used in extrapolating the 3D representation with at least one of a time-of-flight process or a structured light process.
Regarding claim 2, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the at least one landmark is a component of a vehicle containing the rearview mirror assembly (Para[0040] & Figs. 11-12 teaches the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data (see FIGS. 11 and 12).
Regarding claim 3, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 2, wherein the component is fixed relative to the vehicle and includes at least one of a structural pillar, a rear window, an interior light, a roof handle, other structures, components, an imprint, or lighting features specifically added (para[0040] & Figs. 11 and 12 teaches the driver monitoring system determines the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data ).
Regarding claim 4, Raz discloses the monitoring system of claim 2, wherein the component is moveable relative to the vehicle and includes at least one of a headrest, a backrest, or a seat cushion (Figs. 3A-3C). Motivation to combine as indicated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 1, further including an illumination source that is configured to emit structured light illumination in an infrared spectrum towards the occupant’s location. (para[0033] & Fig. 8 teaches the mirror assembly may also include one or more infrared (IR) or near infrared light emitters 24 (such as IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LEDs)).
Regarding claim 6, Raz discloses the monitoring system of claim 5, wherein the structured light illumination includes one or more light spots reflected from the at least one landmark and captured by the imaging device (Para[0031] teaches the structured light illumination 39 is distributed as a light spot array with a plurality of light spots 41 (FIG. 5). More particularly, the structured light source 38 may include a least one laser diode (e.g., a plurality of laser diodes) and an optical lens 42. The optical lens 42 may include a collimation element 44 and a diffractive element 46. The collimation element 44 and the diffractive element 46 may be integrally or separately formed). Motivation to combine as indicated in claim 1
Regarding claim 9, Raz discloses the monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the including a three-dimensional imaging system including at least one of structured light, Time-of-Flight (“ToF”), or stereo vision aligned with the imaging device (Para [0043] teaches FIG. 8, a vision system 15B is configured under a second construction and operates under the principles of Time-of-Flight (“ToF”)).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Peterson et al. (US 2023/0017715 A1) (IDS provided 06/14/2024) in view of Raz et al. (US 2024/0264717 A1) and Waite et al. (US 2013/0038732 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Peterson in view of Raz discloses the monitoring system of claim 9, Peterson further discloses wherein the at least one landmark includes a plurality of landmarks spaced from one another (Para[0030]-[0032], [0040] & Figs. 1-5, 9-13 the driver monitoring system determines the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data (see FIGS. 11 and 12). The system may adjust processing of the image data captured by the camera 18 to accommodate changes in location of the known or particular vehicle features. For example, if a nominal setting of the mirror has a particular feature a predetermined distance laterally and/or vertically from a center of the image data, if it is determined that the particular feature is shifted or offset to one side or the other from the predetermined distance location, the processor shifts or adjusts processing of captured image data to accommodate the lateral and/or vertical shift of the particular feature).
Peterson in view of Raz does not explicitly disclose and the processor is further configured to: extrapolate a depth of the plurality of landmarks from the image at least one of the sequence of images; determine an angle a first angle between the imaging device and one of the plurality of landmarks and a second angle between the imaging device and a different one of the plurality of landmarks; and average or weigh each angle the first angle and the second angle to determine the current orientation of the imaging device relative to the plurality of landmarks based on the first and second angles and the depth of the associated landmarks. However Waite further discloses and the processor is further configured to: extrapolate a depth of the plurality of landmarks from the image at least one of the sequence of images (Para[0031] teaches the third dimension (depth) for the position of the head may be determined from the stereoscopic image by comparing the difference between the first image field and the second image field because each image field was captured at a different viewing angle); determine an angle a first angle between the imaging device and one of the plurality of landmarks and a second angle between the imaging device and a different one of the plurality of landmarks (Para[0038] teaches when the head position of the driver 14 moves (driver 14.sub.1 having a first head position and driver 14.sub.2 having a second head position), the angle .alpha. may change); and average or weigh each angle the first angle and the second angle to determine the current orientation of the imaging device relative to the plurality of landmarks based on the first and second angles and the depth of the associated landmarks (para[0038] & FIGS. 2-5 teaches as a result, the processing device 20 may reposition the rear-facing camera 18 to account for the change in the first field of view 36 of the driver 14. In particular, the rear-facing camera 18.1 may be in a first position to have a second field of view 52..1 when driver 14.1 has a first field of view 36.k. The rear-facing camera 18.sub.2 may be in a second position to have a second field of view 52.sub.2 when driver 14.2 has a first field of view 36.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the invention to use the method of that adjusts processing of image data captured by driver monitoring camera by taking into account of an adjustment of mirror head when driver adjusts mirror head for vision to adjust at rear view of driver of Peterson in view of Raz with the method which analyzes primary video image to determine head position of driver, Field of view is determined based on head position of driver of Waite in order to provide a system in which driver's current viewing angle can be matched with the video image that is currently on the display. The driver's obstructed view can be restored.
11. Claims 11-12, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Peterson et al. (US 2023/0017715 A1) (IDS provided 06/14/2024) in view of Waite et al. (US 2013/0038732 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Peterson discloses a monitoring system comprising: a rearview mirror assembly (para[0030] & Fig. 1 teaches an interior rearview mirror assembly 10 for a vehicle) including a mounting member (para[0030] teaches mirror assembly 10 is configured to be adjustably mounted to an interior portion of a vehicle (such as to an interior or in-cabin surface of a vehicle windshield or a headliner of a vehicle or the like) via a mounting structure or mounting configuration or assembly 16) and a housing (casing 12) that articulates relative to the mounting member (fig. 2, 16); at least one imaging device located in and fixed relative to the housing (para[0031] & FIGS. 3-6 and 8-10 teaches the mirror assembly includes a driver monitoring system (DMS) comprising a driver monitoring camera 18 disposed at a back plate 20) and moveable with the housing (casing 12) between a plurality of orientations, the at least one imaging device configured to capture an image of an occupant's location (para[0031] teaches The driver monitoring system includes the driver monitoring camera and may also include an occupant monitoring camera); and a processor configured; identify at least two landmarks that are components of a vehicle containing the rearview mirror assembly in the plurality of images (Para[0030]-[0032], [0040] & Figs. 1-5, 9-13 the driver monitoring system determines the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data (see FIGS. 11 and 12). The system may adjust processing of the image data captured by the camera 18 to accommodate changes in location of the known or particular vehicle features. For example, if a nominal setting of the mirror has a particular feature a predetermined distance laterally and/or vertically from a center of the image data, if it is determined that the particular feature is shifted or offset to one side or the other from the predetermined distance location, the processor shifts or adjusts processing of captured image data to accommodate the lateral and/or vertical shift of the particular feature) .
Peterson does not explicitly disclose capture an image a plurality of images of an occupant's location; extrapolate angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks; extrapolate a depth of the at least two landmarks in three dimensional space; and extrapolate a current orientation out of the plurality of orientations of the imaging device based on a weighted average of the angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks and the depth of the at least two landmarks. However Waite discloses capture an image a plurality of images of an occupant's location (Para[0038] teaches when the head position of the driver 14 moves (driver 14.sub.1 having a first head position and driver 14.sub.2 having a second head position); extrapolate angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks (Para[0038] teaches when the head position of the driver 14 moves (driver 14.sub.1 having a first head position and driver 14.sub.2 having a second head position), the angle .alpha. may change); extrapolate a depth of the at least two landmarks in three dimensional space (Para[0031] teaches the third dimension (depth) for the position of the head may be determined from the stereoscopic image by comparing the difference between the first image field and the second image field because each image field was captured at a different viewing angle); and extrapolate a current orientation out of the plurality of orientations of the imaging device based on a weighted average of the angles between the at least one imaging device and the at least two landmarks and the depth of the at least two landmarks (para[0038] & FIGS. 2-5 teaches as a result, the processing device 20 may reposition the rear-facing camera 18 to account for the change in the first field of view 36 of the driver 14. In particular, the rear-facing camera 18.1 may be in a first position to have a second field of view 52..1 when driver 14.1 has a first field of view 36.k. The rear-facing camera 18.sub.2 may be in a second position to have a second field of view 52.sub.2 when driver 14.2 has a first field of view 36.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the invention to use the method of that adjusts processing of image data captured by driver monitoring camera by taking into account of an adjustment of mirror head when driver adjusts mirror head for vision to adjust at rear view of driver of Peterson with the method which analyzes primary video image to determine head position of driver, Field of view is determined based on head position of driver of Waite in order to provide a system in which driver's current viewing angle can be matched with the video image that is currently on the display. The driver's obstructed view can be restored.
Regarding claim 12, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 11, wherein the components are fixed relative to the vehicle and includes two or more of a structural pillar, a rear window, an interior light, or a roof handle. (para [0040] & Figs. 11-12 teaches the driver monitoring system determines the position of the driver's head by the determined position or positions of particular fixed vehicle features, such as the rear windows, pillars, center console or the like, in the captured image data).
Regarding claim 15, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 11, wherein an illumination source is configured to emit structured light illumination (para[0033], [0036] teaches IR illuminators 24).
Regarding claim 16, Peterson discloses the monitoring system of claim 15, wherein the structured light illumination is in an infrared spectrum towards the occupant’s location (para[0033] & Fig. 8 teaches the mirror assembly may also include one or more infrared (IR) or near infrared light emitters 24 (such as IR or near-IR light emitting diodes (LEDs).
12. Claims 14, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson et al. (US 2023/0017715 A1) (IDS provided 06/14/2024) in view of Waite et al. (US 2013/0038732 A1) and Tanaka et al. (JP 2023113189A) (machine translation previously attached)
Regarding claim 14, Peterson in view of Waite discloses the monitoring system of claim 11, Peterson in view of Waite does not explicitly disclose, wherein the components are moveable relative to the vehicle and includes two or more of a headrest, a backrest, or a seat cushion. However Tanaka discloses wherein the components are moveable relative to the vehicle and includes two or more of a headrest, a backrest, or a seat cushion. (para[0003] teaches the object may be, for example, a window frame, a vehicle seat, or a headrest, para[0031] teaches he captured image GP output from the imaging device 1 to the deviation amount detection device 3 is basically an image captured when the driver is not seated in the driver's seat. However, even if the driver is seated in the driver's seat, the captured image GP may be an image taken while the driver is seated in the driver's seat, as long as the driver is seated in a manner that does not block the view of the structure 2.). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the invention to use the method of that adjusts processing of image data captured by driver monitoring camera by taking into account of an adjustment of mirror head when driver adjusts mirror head for vision to adjust at rear view of driver of Peterson in view of Waite with the deviation amount detection method of Tanaka in order to provide a system for suppress deterioration in the accuracy of calculating the deviation amount due to changes in the ambient light conditions.
Regarding claim 17, Peterson in view of Waite discloses the monitoring system of claim 15, Peterson in view of Waite does not explicitly disclose wherein the structured light illumination includes a one or more a plurality of light spots reflected from the at least one landmark and captured by the at least one imaging device to obtain the depth of the at least two landmarks in three dimensional space under principles of structured light. However Tanaka discloses disclose wherein the structured light illumination includes a one or more a plurality of light spots reflected from the at least one landmark and captured by the at least one imaging device to obtain the depth of the at least two landmarks in three dimensional space under principles of structured light (Para[0066] & Fig. 19 teaches The position detection unit 61 acquires images of the three light emitting points 60 a , 60 b , and 60 C captured by the imaging device 1 The position detection unit 61 detects the light emitting point image positions, which are the positions of the three light emitting points 60a, 60b, and 60c on the image. The position detection unit 61 outputs light emitting point image position information indicating the light emitting point image position to the deviation amount calculation unit 62). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the invention to use the method of that adjusts processing of image data captured by driver monitoring camera by taking into account of an adjustment of mirror head when driver adjusts mirror head for vision to adjust at rear view of driver of Peterson in view of Waite with the deviation amount detection method of Tanaka in order to provide a system for suppress deterioration in the accuracy of calculating the deviation amount due to changes in the ambient light conditions.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROWINA J CATTUNGAL whose telephone number is (571)270-5922. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30-6pm.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571) 272-7527. 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.
/ROWINA J CATTUNGAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights