CTFR 18/488,341 CTFR 90395 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. In response to amendment filed 05/01/2026, claims 1, 3-8 have been amended. No claims are new. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haruda et al. (JP2018162030A) in view of Ari et al. (JP2009023565A), and further in view of Kassner et al. (US 10940757 B2) In regards to claim 1, Harada teaches, An information provision device comprising: (See abstract, A display device for a vehicle includes: a display part for displaying an image from an on-vehicle camera for imaging an external world of a vehicle; a sight line detection part for detecting movement of a sight line of the driver) an information display screen configured to display information to be provided to a driver of a vehicle; and (See fig. 4, paragraph 17, The display of the image of the outside world is displayed on the display unit 10 arranged in the vehicle. The display unit 10 may be disposed on the front panel, but in the present embodiment, the display unit 10 is an electronic room mirror that visually confirms the rear side and the rear side.) a control device configured to control displayed content of the information display screen, wherein the control device is configured to: (See fig. 1, highlight display processing unit 180 185, paragraph 18, display processing unit 180 are realized by a CPU…paragraph 28, The emphasis display processing unit 180 emphatically displays an object displayed on the image of the display unit 10, and includes an emphasis display determination unit 185 and an image superimposition unit 190…paragraph 40, the image superimposing unit 190 of the emphasis display processing unit 180 highlights and displays an object as an object in the video input via the rear camera 140 and the image processing unit 150.) detect a positional relationship of the vehicle and an object present in a rear region of the vehicle based on surrounding data showing a situation in the surroundings of the vehicle; (See paragraph 18, The vehicle display device 100 includes…a rear camera 140…paragraph 23, The rear camera 140 picks up an image of the rear of the vehicle, captures an image behind the vehicle, and outputs the video signal indicating the captured image to the video processing unit 150. The rear camera 140 may be provided at the rear portion of the vehicle or may be provided on a room mirror which is the display portion 10…paragraph 24, The image processing unit 150 performs image processing on the image signal representing the image captured by the rearward camera 140. The image processing unit 150 performs predetermined processing on the image signal input from the rearward camera 140 and superimposes the processed image signal on the image Section 190…paragraph 25, The distance measuring unit 170 is connected to the distance measuring unit 160, measures the distance to an object in an image taken by the rear camera 140 (another vehicle, person, etc. located behind the own vehicle) and measures the distance. Also see paragraphs 26-27) detect a line-of-sight direction of the driver based on driver data showing a state of the driver; and (See paragraph 19, The line-of-sight detection camera 110 captures an image of the head of the driver in the vehicle and outputs image data of the captured image used for detecting information on the driver's line-of-sight movement direction to the line-of-sight detection unit 120…paragraph 21, The line of vision detection unit 120 detects the movement of the driver's eyes. Also see paragraph 22) display rear region information including the positional relationship at the information display screen in response to detecting that the driver is viewing a rear check device for checking the rear of the vehicle based on the line-of-sight direction of the driver. (See fig. 4, paragraph 34, the image superimposing unit 190 superimposes When the line of sight moves to the display unit 10, the object displayed on the display unit 10 is highlighted…see paragraphs 44-45, the emphasis display processing unit 180 highlights and displays the object in the video displayed on the display unit 10. Also see paragraphs 32-33, criteria for highlighting objects) Harada does not specifically teach, the rear check device being distinct from the information display screen where there is a separate information display screen located at a different location from the rear/side mirrors. Also, Harada does not specifically teach, end display of the rear region information in response to a predetermined time period elapsing after an… detection of the driver viewing the information display screen Ari further teaches, the rear check device being distinct from the information display screen (See fig. 14, FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating a display example of the monitor when the object viewed by the driver is a room mirror. Also see page 2, the display target determining unit determines the vehicle rear as a display target when it is determined that the driver has seen a side mirror or a room mirror based on the line of sight detected by the line of sight detection unit. May be… since the rear of the vehicle is displayed on the monitor according to the driver's intention, the driver can confirm the rear situation without diverting his line of sight from the front, which can contribute to safe driving…page 5, when the object seen by the driver is a side mirror, an outer frame having the same shape as the mirror surface of the side mirror is displayed on the monitor. If the object seen by the driver is a room mirror, an outer frame having the same panoramic shape as the mirror surface of the room mirror is displayed on the monitor.) end display of the rear region information in response to a predetermined time period elapsing after an… detection of the driver viewing the information display screen (See page 7, The monitor control unit 24 controls the monitor 14 to display the video acquired from the outside camera 12 on the monitor 14. When the driver's line of sight has not been directed to the monitor 14 for a predetermined time (for example, 5 seconds), the monitor control unit 24 controls the monitor 14 to stop the display. Here, an example is described in which the monitor display is stopped when the driver is not looking at the monitor. However, the monitor control unit 24 performs control so that the monitor display is stopped after a predetermined time has elapsed from the video display.) Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the device of Harada to further comprise screen separation device further taught by Ari because the display object that the driver wants to see is displayed on the monitor at an appropriate timing, so that the driver can see the object without diverting his gaze from the front. Thus, it is useful as a driving support device (page 12). Harada-Ari does not specifically teach, a predetermined time period elapsing after an initial detection of the driver viewing the information display screen . That is, the timer is initiated during first/initial detection of the driver viewing the information display screen Kassner further teaches, a predetermined time period elapsing after an initial detection of the driver viewing the information display screen (See claim 1, determining that the user is viewing the display device again and, in response thereto, displaying the message again; starting a timer to initiate a display period of the message in response to the user viewing the message ; in response to whichever occurs first, expiry of the display period or the user averting their gaze, hiding the message; stopping the timer in response to the user no longer viewing the display device; and continuing the timer in response to the user again viewing the display device.) Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the device of Harada-Ari to further comprise timer device further taught by Kassner because effective display of messages can be achieved without disturbing other users/operator too much, thereby improving overall experience of all users within vehicle (col. 2, lines 19-21, 45-62) In regards to claim 3, Harada-Ari- Kassner teaches the information provision device according to claim 1, wherein the rear region information includes information relating to the type of the object. (Claim does not necessarily state that rear region information includes displaying “text” indicating the type of object. See fig. 4, highlighted circle indicates both positional relationship between the object and the vehicle as well as type of object that is nearby providing emphasis to the driver) In regards to claim 4, Harada-Ari- Kassner teaches the information provision device according to claim 1, wherein the surrounding data is an image of the rear region of the vehicle captured by a camera. (See paragraph 18, The vehicle display device 100 includes…a rear camera 140…paragraph 23, The rear camera 140 picks up an image of the rear of the vehicle, captures an image behind the vehicle, and outputs the video signal indicating the captured image to the video processing unit 150. The rear camera 140 may be provided at the rear portion of the vehicle or may be provided on a room mirror which is the display portion 10…paragraph 24, The image processing unit 150 performs image processing on the image signal representing the image captured by the rearward camera 140. The image processing unit 150 performs predetermined processing on the image signal input from the rearward camera 140 and superimposes the processed image signal on the image Section 190…paragraph 25, The distance measuring unit 170 is connected to the distance measuring unit 160, measures the distance to an object in an image taken by the rear camera 140 (another vehicle, person, etc. located behind the own vehicle) and measures the distance. Also see paragraphs 26-27) In regards to claim 5, Harada-Ari- Kassner teaches the information provision device according to claim 1, wherein the driver data is an image of a face of the driver captured by a driver monitor camera. (See paragraph 19, The line-of-sight detection camera 110 captures an image of the head of the driver in the vehicle and outputs image data of the captured image used for detecting information on the driver's line-of-sight movement direction to the line-of-sight detection unit 120…paragraph 21, The line of vision detection unit 120 detects the movement of the driver's eyes. Also see paragraph 22) Claims 6-7 are similar in scope to claim 1, therefore, they are rejected under similar rationale as set forth above. In regards to claim 8, Harada-Ari- Kassner teaches the information provision device according to claim 1, wherein the rear region information further includes the object present in the rear region of the vehicle, and wherein displaying the rear region information comprises displaying the positional relationship and the object present in the rear region of the vehicle at the information display screen. (See Ari page 7. Also see Harada paragraph 46) Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above necessitated by applicant’s amendment. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5. 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, JAMES J LEE can be reached at (571)270-5965. 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. /JUSTIN S LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 2 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 3 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 4 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 5 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 6 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 7 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 8 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 9 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/488,341 Page 10 Art Unit: 3668
Prosecution Insights