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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed on 9/06/2023 has been entered. The Applicant amended specification and the abstract.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), based on an application filed in Japan on 10/18/2022. The Applicant has filed a certified copy of the JP2022-166812 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55, which has been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/09/2025 and 9/06/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 9/06/2023 are accepted to by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Such claim limitations are: “photographing means … mounted” in claim 1; and “photographing means .. judged” in claim 2.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: “As an example of the photographing means as mentioned above, a camera which is referred to as what is called a “side camera” etc.”, [0020].
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka et al. (US 2021/0179084, of record) in view of SHUSAKU et al. (JP 2003/104123, Examiner provided machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Yamanaka teaches a driving assist apparatus (refer to US 20210179084) comprising; photographing means (external cameras 19, [0031]) which are mounted in side mirrors (external cameras 19 include a front camera for capturing an image in front of the vehicle and a rear camera for capturing an image to the rear of the vehicle. … cameras that are provided in the vicinity of the door mirrors of the vehicle to capture images on left and right sides of the vehicle, [0031]) which can be opened and closed between a first state where a driver can visually recognize a rear side of a self-vehicle and a second state where a protruding margin of said side mirrors in a width direction of said self-vehicle is small and photograph surrounding of said self-vehicle (vehicle state determining unit 46 acquires the state of the vehicle based on signals from various sensors, based on the detection result of the state detecting sensor 13, the door open/close sensor 29, door mirror position sensor 31, provided in the vehicle, and determines whether the vehicle is in a prohibition state in which the autonomous movement of the vehicle should be prohibited., the driving operation sensor 12 and the state detecting sensor 13 each correspond to the vehicle state detecting device configured to detect the state of the vehicle [0049-0054]; when door mirror position sensor 31 of state detecting sensor 13 shows close, it corresponds to "a second state in which a displacement of the own vehicle in a vehicle width direction is reduced"), and a control part which performs a driving assist for said driver based on photographed images photographed by said photographing means (Fig. 1, a control device 15 configured to control a powertrain 4 including a transmission, a brake device 5, and a steering device 6 to execute a driving process for autonomously moving a vehicle to a target position, [0005]; control device 15, Fig. 1 ), wherein: said control part comprises a judgment part which judges whether said side mirrors are in said first state or in said second state based on said photographed images (vehicle state determining unit 46, Fig. 1; vehicle state determining unit 46 acquires the state of the vehicle based on signals from various sensors, based on the detection result of the state detecting sensor 13, the door open/close sensor 29, door mirror position sensor 31, provided in the vehicle, and determines whether the vehicle is in a prohibition state in which the autonomous movement of the vehicle should be prohibited., the driving operation sensor 12 and the state detecting sensor 13 each correspond to the vehicle state detecting device configured to detect the state of the vehicle [0049-0054]), and said control part is configured so as to continue said driving assist when said side mirrors are judged to be in said first state and suspend said driving assist and notify to said driver that said driving assist is not carried out when said side mirrors are judged to be in said second state (vehicle state determining unit 46 acquires the state of the vehicle based on signals from various sensors provided in the vehicle, and determines whether the vehicle is in a prohibition state in which the autonomous movement (namely, the autonomous parking operation or the autonomous unparking operation) of the vehicle should be prohibited .. the prohibition state may be also referred to as a suspension state in which the autonomous travel of the vehicle should be temporarily suspended. [0049-0054]; a vehicle state detecting device (13) configured to detect a state of the vehicle; and a notification device (32, 33) configured to be controlled by the control device to make a notification to the occupant, [0005], the sound generating device 33 to output an end notification, [0069], [0071] see Figs. 1 and 4).
Yamanaka doesn’t explicitly teach the photographable areas are different between in first state and in second state.
Yamanaka and Shusaku are related as vehicle door mirror system.
Shusaku teaches the photographable areas are different between in first state and in second state (Fig. 3 shows photographable areas are different between in first, open state and in second, closed state; image pickup means CAM, and vehicle body BD provided when the mirror device is folded, when the mirror device is opened.” mirror device 101 for a vehicle that can be folded, an image pickup means CAM is arranged such that it picks up, in a state that the door mirror is folded, a region containing a part of a field of vision via the mirror MIR in a state that the door mirror is not folded., [end of page 5 and beginning of page 6 of Machine translation MT; and [abstract]; see Figs. 3a and 3b])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the apparatus of Yamanaka to include the photographable areas different between in first state and in second state, as taught by Shusaku for the predictable advantage of minimizing air resistance when driving at high speed and avoiding an oncoming vehicle while traveling on a narrow road, or when parking while retracting into a narrow multistory parking lot, as taught by Shusaku in [beginning of page 6 of Machine translation].
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka et al. in view of SHUSAKU et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Masami (JP 2011/113292, of record, Examiner provided machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Yamanaka teaches the apparatus according to claim 1 (see above), images photographed by photographing means when side mirrors are in second state, and judgment part is configured so as to judge that side mirrors are in second state (cameras 19 include a front camera for capturing an image in front of the vehicle and a rear camera for capturing an image to the rear of the vehicle. … cameras that are provided in the vicinity of the door mirrors of the vehicle to capture images on left and right sides of the vehicle, [0031]; state detecting sensor 13 is a sensor configured to detect a change in a state of the vehicle according to an operation by the occupant, [0036]; control device 15 consists of an electronic control unit (ECU) that includes a CPU, a nonvolatile memory such as a ROM, a volatile memory such as a RAM, and the like. The CPU executes operation processing according to a program so that the control device 15 executes various types of vehicle control. [0038], vehicle state determining unit 46 acquires the state of the vehicle based on signals from various sensors, based on the detection result of the state detecting sensor 13, the door open/close sensor 29, [0051]; map storage unit 21 consists of a known storage device such as a flash memory or a hard disk, and stores map information, [Fig. 1]; the external environment recognizing unit 41 analyzes the images captured by the external cameras 19 based on a known image analysis method such as pattern matching, [0043]. Shusaku teaches Judgment based on changes of images regarding images sampled at every unit time two images that are consecutive in time are compared, [page 7 of MT].
The modified Yamanaka doesn’t explicitly teach a storage part which previously stores memory images which are photographed when actual images which are photographed images photographed by photographing means are judged to coincide with said memory images and judge that said side mirrors are in said first state when said actual images are judged not to coincide with said memory images.
Yamanaka and MASAMI are related as image determination system for vehicle.
MASAMI teaches a storage part which previously stores memory images which are photographed images photographed by said photographing means, and actual images which are photographed images photographed by photographing means are judged to coincide with said memory images and judge that side mirrors are in first state when actual images are judged not to coincide with memory images (A storage part 13 in an image determination device 10 stores first partial image data 13a representing a feature of an opened state included in image data captured by the imaging part 12 in the opened state of the movable part 11. stores second partial image data 13b representing a feature of a closed state included in image data captured by the imaging part 12 in the closed state of the movable part 11. A determination part 14 determines whether image data to be determined is captured in the closed state by using the first partial image data 13a and the second partial image data 13b which are stored in the storage part 13, [abstract and page 3 of MT]; the determination unit 14 determines the determination target image based on the result of comparing the characteristics of the determination target image data corresponding to the first data 13a and the characteristics of the determination target image data corresponding to the second data 13b. It is determined whether or not the data is image data taken with the movable unit 11 in the open state. [page 3 of MT]; also see [page 8 of MT]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the apparatus of modified Yamanaka to use a storage part which previously stores memory images which are photographed images photographed by said photographing means, and actual images which are photographed images photographed by photographing means are judged to coincide with said memory images and judge that side mirrors are in first state when actual images are judged not to coincide with memory images, as taught by Masami for the predictable advantage of efficiently and accurately determine whether an imaging part, whose direction and position are changed according to a movable part to be opened/closed, is set in proper position and direction [abstract].
Regarding claim 3, the modified Yamanaka teaches the apparatus according to claim 2 (see above), the modified Yamanaka teaches judgment part is configured so as to judge whether said actual images coincide with said memory (see claim 2). Masami teaches when the door mirrors 50a and 50b are in an open state or a closed state, features are extracted from the image data taken by the vehicle-mounted cameras 60c and 60d, respectively, and stored as template data corresponding to each of the features, image processing such as edge extraction is executed on the image data taken by the vehicle-mounted camera 60c, the number of pixels of the edge portion included in the image data is counted, and the image data is compared with each template data, so that a mirror opening / closing determination unit 160 is provided to determine whether the image data taken by the vehicle-mounted camera 60c is the image data taken in the open or closed state of the door mirrors 50a and 50b, [page 4 of MT]. Therefore, Masami described a matter corresponding to the matters specifying the invention in which "the determination unit determines whether or not the actual image matches the stored image based on the contrast in the region corresponding to the vehicle body of the own vehicle". Yamanaka disclosed the determination unit, the former determines whether or not the actual image matches the stored image based on the contrast in the area corresponding to the vehicle body of the own vehicle, and determines whether or not the door mirror is closed only by the door mirror position sensor 31 of the own vehicle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAHMAN ABDUR whose telephone number is (571)270-0438. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 5:30 pm PST.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/R.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872