DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Sugiyama’s different exposure periods are not analogous to length of time of exposure. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Sugiyama (para. 1042) discloses to make an exposure time of the IR irradiation period short and to make an exposure time of the IR non-irradiation period long. For example, in the case of night photography with a surveillance camera, since the sensitivity of an image being not irradiated with projected IR becomes low, it is desirable that an exposure period can be set to be relatively longer. This can be realized by changing a duty ratio of the IR irradiation period and the IR non-irradiation period. Furthermore, Sugiyama (para. 0090-0093) discloses that the image sensor assigns the IR irradiation period to the W pixel and assigns the IR non-irradiation period to the RGB pixels.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/16/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claim 17 claims the amended limitation “wherein the control system is further configured to detect occupant behavior in the first image or second image on the basis of comparing image quality between the first image and the second image and reviewing an image of greater quality”. Applicant states there is support within para. 0022 and 0030-0032 of the as-filed application. However, the examiner could not locate support for comparing image quality between the first image and the second image, and reviewing an image of greater quality within these paragraphs. Therefore, independent claim 17 fails to comply with the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). Applicant is required to amend the claims or show support for the limitation being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim 20 claims the amended limitation “wherein the control system is configured to detect a reflection from a pair of eyeglasses from a vehicle occupant and compare the reflection in the first image and the second image and review which of the first and second images has the least amount of reflection for monitoring the eyes of the vehicle occupant. Applicant states there is support within para. 0023 of the as-filed application. This limitation is narrower than the limitation being rejected above for independent claim 17. The examiner could not locate support for comparing the reflection in the first image and the second image and review which of the first and second images has the least amount of reflection. Therefore, claim 20 fails to comply with the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). Applicant is required to amend the claims or show support for the limitation being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
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.
Claim 1-2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Sugiyama (US 20180367745).
Regarding claim 1, Onozawa discloses a monitoring system comprising:
an imaging device including a first exposure profile and a second exposure profile; [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Solid-state imaging element (10). Also, see 0062-0063, image capture of a color and an infrared image.]
an illumination source configured to emit at least one of infrared (IR) or near infrared (NIR) illumination; and [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Infrared LED (70).]
a control system configured to alternate between the first exposure profile and the second exposure profile [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
However, Sugiyama does disclose
[See Sugiyama [0087] Different exposure periods between the infrared pixels and the color pixels. Also, see 0091, with regard to the W pixel, makes the exposure period correspond to an IR irradiation period and 0092, with regard to RGB pixels, makes the exposure period correspond to an IR non-irradiation period. Also, see 0142, IR irradiation period is short and the IR non-irradiation period is long.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa to add the teachings of Sugiyama, in order to improve upon image quality [See Sugiyama [0142]].
Regarding claim 2, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) disclose the system of claim 1. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the first exposure profile has a first exposure time for capturing the emission of illumination from the illumination from the illumination source and the second exposure profile has a second exposure time that is longer than the first exposure profile for capturing light in the visible spectrum from the ambient lighting.
However, Sugiyama does disclose
wherein the first exposure profile has a first exposure time for capturing the emission of illumination from the illumination from the illumination source and the second exposure profile has a second exposure time that is longer than the first exposure profile for capturing light in the visible spectrum from the ambient lighting. [See Sugiyama [0087] Different exposure periods between the infrared pixels and the color pixels. Also, see 0091, with regard to the W pixel, makes the exposure period correspond to an IR irradiation period and 0092, with regard to RGB pixels, makes the exposure period correspond to an IR non-irradiation period. Also, see 0142, IR irradiation period is short and the IR non-irradiation period is long.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) disclose the system of claim 1. Furthermore, Onozawa discloses
wherein the first pattern includes alternating to the first exposure profile after each of the second exposure profiles. [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Sugiyama (US 20180367745) and in further view of Sharma et al. (herein after will be referred to as Sharma) (US Patent No. 11,606,517).
Regarding claim 3, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) disclose the system of claim 1. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to determine an intensity of the ambient lighting by detecting a quality characteristic in images captured during the second exposure profile.
However, Sharma does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to determine an intensity of the ambient lighting by detecting a quality characteristic in images captured during the second exposure profile. [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 31-35] Compare the intensity of the light in captured image to one or more intensity thresholds to determine ambient lighting conditions. Also, see [Col. 25 lines 20-30] color images.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) to add the teachings of Sharma, in order to adjust one or more settings of a camera based on ambient lighting conditions [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 9-15]].
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Sugiyama (US 20180367745) in view of Sharma (US Patent No. 11,606,517) and in further view of Raag (US 20220308228).
Regarding claim 4, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama and Sharma) disclose the system of claim 3. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to, upon a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is below a threshold, synchronize the imaging device and the illumination source to a second pattern that is different than the first pattern.
However, Sharma does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to, upon a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is below a threshold, [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 9-15] Adjust one or more settings of the camera based on ambient lighting conditions (daytime vs nighttime, Col. 31 line 22). Also, see Col. 31 lines 31-35, compare ambient intensity to threshold.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Sugiyam) to add the teachings of Sharma, in order to adjust one or more settings of a camera based on ambient lighting conditions [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 9-15]].
Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama and Sharma) do not explicitly disclose
synchronize the imaging device and the illumination source to a second pattern that is different than the first pattern.
However, Raag does disclose
synchronize the imaging device and the illumination source to a second pattern that is different than the first pattern. [See Raag [0394] Infrared imaging with shorter exposure times at night and explains the disadvantages of using a visible camera at reduced light conditions. Also, see 0063, Infrared and visual imaging during daytime and Infrared during nighttime. Also, see 0068, active illumination for infrared sensor.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama and Sharma) to add the teachings of Raag, in order to utilize infrared imaging with active illumination at nighttime due to the disadvantages of using a visible camera at nighttime.
Regarding claim 5, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama, Sharma and Raag) disclose the system of claim 4. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the second pattern includes only the first exposure profile.
However, Raag does disclose
wherein the second pattern includes only the first exposure profile. [See Raag [0394] Infrared imaging with shorter exposure times at night.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama, Sharma and Raag) disclose the system of claim 4. Furthermore, Onozawa discloses
wherein the control system is configured to alternate between the first exposure profile and the second exposure profile in accordance with the first pattern. [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to maintain only the second pattern until a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is above a threshold,
However, Raag does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to maintain only the second pattern until a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is above a threshold, [See Raag [0394] Infrared imaging with shorter exposure times at night and explains the disadvantages of using a visible camera at reduced light conditions. Also, see 0063, Infrared and visual image during daytime.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 4.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Sugiyama (US 20180367745) and in further view of Weller et al. (herein after will be referred to as Weller) (US 20180099612).
Regarding claim 8, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) disclose the system of claim 1. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the imaging device is coupled to a rearview mirror assembly for a vehicle.
However, Weller does disclose
wherein the imaging device is coupled to a rearview mirror assembly for a vehicle. [See Weller [Figs. 1-2 and 0014]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama) to add the teachings of Weller, in perform a simple substitution of camera housings.
Regarding claim 9, Onozawa (modified by Sugiyama and Weller) disclose the system of claim 8. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the rearview mirror assembly includes an electro-optic device defining a front surface configured to face a vehicle occupant position and a display located on a side of the electro-optic device opposite the front surface.
However, Weller does disclose
wherein the rearview mirror assembly includes an electro-optic device defining a front surface configured to face a vehicle occupant position and a display located on a side of the electro-optic device opposite the front surface. [See Weller [Figs. 1-2 and 0014]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 8.
Claims 10-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Weller (US 20180099612) in further view of Saenger et al. (herein after will be referred to as Saenger) (US 20180316859).
Regarding claim 10, Onozawa discloses a rearview mirror assembly comprising:
including a first exposure profile and a second exposure profile; [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Solid-state imaging element (10). Also, see 0062-0063, image capture of a color and an infrared image.]
an illumination source configured to emit at least one of infrared (IR) or near infrared (NIR) illumination; and [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Infrared LED (70).]
a control system configured to alternate between the first exposure profile and the second exposure profile in accordance with a first pattern, wherein the first exposure profile corresponds to the emission of illumination from the illumination source and the second exposure profile corresponds to ambient lighting without the emission of illumination form the illumination source, and [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
a housing; a transmission element including a reflective state; a filter configured to selectively attenuate a transmission of infrared (IR) or near infrared (NIR) illumination or attenuate a transmission of ambient lighting based on an energization state; and a monitoring system at least partially located in the housing and comprising: an imaging device aligned with the filter and
the energization state of the filter is synced with one of the first exposure profiles or the second exposure profiles.
However, Weller does disclose
a housing; a transmission element including a reflective state; a filter configured to attenuate a transmission of one or more wavelength spectrums; and a monitoring system at least partially located in the housing and comprising: an imaging device aligned with the filter and [See Weller [Figs. 1-3 and 0014, 0023, 0034] Rearview mirror housing including an electro-optic element functioning as a mirror or a display, electro-optic color filter and a microcontroller.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa to add the teachings of Weller, in perform a simple substitution of camera housings.
Onozawa (modified by Weller) do not explicitly disclose
the energization state of the filter is synced with one of the first exposure profiles or the second exposure profiles.
However, Saenger does disclose
the energization state of the filter is synced with one of the first exposure profiles or the second exposure profiles. [See Saenger [0045] Filter is a liquid crystal structure. Also, see 0059, Liquid crystal structures are selectively activated between a first configuration and a second configuration. Also, see 0063, filters for operating in NIR mode while filtering visible light and visible mode while filtering infrared.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller) to add the teachings of Saenger, in order to improve upon image quality by controlling a transmission of entering light [See Saenger [0002]].
Regarding claim 11, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) disclose the system of claim 10. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the filter is configured to attenuate selected wavelengths from the ambient lighting outside of the illumination spectrum from the illumination source.
However, Saenger does disclose
wherein the filter is configured to attenuate selected wavelengths from the ambient lighting outside of the illumination spectrum from the illumination source. [See Saenger [0051] selectively limiting the transmission of light to the image sensor over one or more ranges of wavelengths. Also, see 0054, block some of the visible spectrum portion… the benefit to having independent control of the visible and near-infrared light.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) disclose the system of claim 10. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the filter includes a liquid crystal structure configured to switch between a first energization state, wherein an illumination spectrum from the illumination source is attenuated, and a second energization state, wherein selected wavelengths from the ambient lighting outside of the illumination spectrum from the illumination source is attenuated.
However, Saenger does disclose
wherein the filter includes a liquid crystal structure configured to switch between a first energization state, wherein an illumination spectrum from the illumination source is attenuated, and a second energization state, wherein selected wavelengths from the ambient lighting outside of the illumination spectrum from the illumination source is attenuated. [See Saenger [0045] Filter is a liquid crystal structure. Also, see 0059, Liquid crystal structures are selectively activated between a first configuration and a second configuration. Also, see 0063, filters for operating in NIR mode while filtering visible light and visible mode while filtering infrared.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 10.
Regarding claim 13, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) disclose the system of claim 12. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to switch the filter to the first energization state when the imaging device is in the second exposure profile and switch the filter to the second energization state when the imaging device is in the first exposure profile.
However, Saenger does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to switch the filter to the first energization state when the imaging device is in the second exposure profile and switch the filter to the second energization state when the imaging device is in the first exposure profile. [See Saenger [0003] Adjust the filter from the first configuration to the second configuration in response to an environmental lighting condition.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 10.
Regarding claim 14, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) discloses the system of claim 13. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the liquid crystal structure includes a chiral liquid crystal polymer disposed between a first substrate and a second substrate.
However, Saenger does disclose
wherein the liquid crystal structure includes a chiral liquid crystal polymer disposed between a first substrate and a second substrate. [See Saenger [0045] Filter is a liquid crystal structure which corresponds to a chiral liquid crystal polymer disposed between a first and second substrate.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 10.
Regarding claim 16, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) disclose the assembly of claim 10. Furthermore, Onozawa discloses
wherein the first pattern includes alternating to the first exposure profile after each of the second exposure profiles. [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Weller (US 20180099612) in view of Saenger (US 20180316859) in view of Sharma (US Patent No. 11,606,517) and in further view of Raag (US 20220308228).
Regarding claim 15, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) discloses the system of claim 10. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to determine an intensity of the ambient lighting based on at least one of resolution or color content of an image captured by the second exposure profile and, upon a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is below a threshold,
change the imaging device to a second pattern that includes only the first exposure profile.
However, Sharma does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to determine an intensity of the ambient lighting based on at least one of resolution or color content of an image captured by the second exposure profile and, upon a determination that the intensity of the ambient lighting is below a threshold, [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 31-35] Compare the intensity of the light in captured image to one or more intensity thresholds to determine ambient lighting conditions. Also, see [Col. 25 lines 20-30] color images.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller and Saenger) to add the teachings of Sharma, in order to adjust one or more settings of a camera based on ambient lighting conditions [See Sharma [Col. 31 lines 9-15]].
Onozawa (modified by Weller, Saenger and Sharma) do not explicitly disclose
change the imaging device to a second pattern that includes only the first exposure profile.
However, Raag does disclose
change the imaging device to a second pattern that includes only the first exposure profile. [See Raag [0394] Infrared imaging with shorter exposure times at night and explains the disadvantages of using a visible camera at reduced light conditions. Also, see 0063, Infrared and visual image during daytime.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller, Saenger and Sharma) to add the teachings of Raag, in order to utilize infrared imaging at nighttime due to the disadvantages of using a visible camera at nighttime.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Weller (US 20180099612) and in further view of Curtis et al. (herein after will be referred to as Curtis) (US 20170072850).
Regarding claim 17, Onozawa discloses a rearview mirror assembly comprising:
an imaging device including a first exposure profile for generating a first image type and a second exposure profile for generating a second image type; [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Solid-state imaging element (10). Also, see 0062-0063, image capture of a color and an infrared image.]
an illumination source configured to emit at least one of infrared (IR) or near infrared (NIR) illumination; [See Onozawa [Fig. 1] Infrared LED (70).]
a control system configured to alternate between the first exposure profile and the second exposure profile in accordance with a first pattern, wherein the first exposure profile corresponds to the emission of illumination from the illumination source and the second exposure profile corresponds to ambient lighting in the visible spectrum without the emission of illumination from the illumination source; and [See Onozawa [0062-0063 and Fig. 3] Alternating image capture of a color image and an infrared image, wherein the color image is acquired when the infrared LED is OFF. Also, see Abstract, color image in synch with a non-emitting period and an infrared image in synch with an emitting period of the infrared LED.]
Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
a housing: a display located within the housing; and a monitoring system at least partially located in the housing and comprising:
wherein the control system is further configured to detect occupant behavior in the first image or second image on the basis of comparing image quality between the first image and the second image and reviewing an image of greater quality.
However, Weller does disclose
a housing: a display located within the housing; and a monitoring system at least partially located in the housing and comprising: [See Weller [Figs. 1-3 and 0014, 0023, 0034] Rearview mirror housing including an electro-optic element functioning as a mirror or a display, electro-optic color filter and a microcontroller.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa to add the teachings of Weller, in perform a simple substitution of camera housings.
Onozawa (modified by Weller) do not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to detect occupant behavior in the first image or second image on the basis of comparing image quality between the first image and the second image and reviewing an image of greater quality.
However, Curtis does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to detect occupant behavior in the first image or second image on the basis of comparing image quality between the first image and the second image and reviewing an image of greater quality. [See Curtis [0055] The system dynamically selects images from either or both cameras (i.e. infrared and visible images) for analysis based on image signal quality. Also, see 0073, driver behavior is determined based on the on-board vehicle system sensor output.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller) to add the teachings of Curtis, in order to improve upon image processing/analysis by selecting an image of higher quality.
Regarding claim 18, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Curtis) disclose the assembly of claim 17. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the display is configured to generate information related to the first image type and the second image type.
However, Weller does disclose
wherein the display is configured to generate information related to the first image type and the second image type. [See Weller [Figs. 1-3 and 0014, 0023, 0034] Rearview mirror with display.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 17.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Weller (US 20180099612) in view of Curtis (US 20170072850) in view of Kamio et al. (herein after will be referred to as Kamio) (US 20190355097) and in further view of Arciniaga (US 20190126831).
Regarding claim 19, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Curtis) disclose the assembly of claim 18. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to monitor the occupant behavior for an unsafe driver or passenger activity from the first image type and the second image type by overlaying the first image type and the second image type, and
wherein the information generated by the display includes a notification related to the unsafe driver or passenger activity.
However, Kamio does disclose
wherein the control system is further configured to monitor the occupant behavior for an unsafe driver or passenger activity from the first image type and the second image type by overlaying the first image type and the second image type, and [See Kamio [0468] Determining if driver falls asleep utilizing camera. Also, see 0058, Combination of infrared image and visible image.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller and Curtis) to add the teachings of Kamio, in order to improving image quality by performing image fusion [See Kamio [0001-0002]].
Onozawa (modified by Weller, Curtis and Kamio) do not explicitly disclose
wherein the information generated by the display includes a notification related to the unsafe driver or passenger activity.
However, Arciniaga does disclose
wherein the information generated by the display includes a notification related to the unsafe driver or passenger activity. [See Arciniaga [0005, 0016] Display notifications on a rearview mirror display system.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller, Curtis and Kamio) to add the teachings of Arciniaga, in order to display vital information to a user.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O Onozawa (US 20130002882) in view of Weller (US 20180099612) in view of Curtis (US 20170072850) in view of Sheldon et al. (herein after will be referred to as Sheldon) (US 20200393688) and in further view of Lee (US 20160148065).
Regarding claim 20, Onozawa (modified by Weller and Curtis) disclose the assembly of claim 19. Furthermore, Onozawa does not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is configured to detect a reflection from a pair of eyeglasses from a vehicle occupant and compare the reflection in the first image and the second image and review which of the first and second images has the least amount of the reflection for monitoring eyes of the vehicle occupant.
However, Sheldon does disclose
compare the reflection in the first image and the second image and review which of the first and second images has the least amount of the reflection [See Sheldon [0095] Imaging algorithm selects the output image as the representative of the multiple captured images, wherein the output image has the least glare or surface reflections in the image.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller and Curtis) to add the teachings of Sheldon, in order to improve upon image analysis by selecting image data with the least amount of artifacts present within the images acquired.
Onozawa (modified by Weller, Curtis and Sheldon) do not explicitly disclose
wherein the control system is configured to detect a reflection from a pair of eyeglasses from a vehicle occupant and
for monitoring eyes of the vehicle occupant.
However, Lee does disclose
wherein the control system is configured to detect a reflection from a pair of eyeglasses from a vehicle occupant and [See Lee [0054] Detecting if a driver uses glasses for the purposes of eye tracking.]
for monitoring eyes of the vehicle occupant. [See Lee [0054] Detecting if a driver uses glasses for the purposes of eye tracking.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the system by Onozawa (modified by Weller, Curtis and Sheldon) to add the teachings of Lee, in order to improve upon the reliability of image analysis for driver monitoring [See Lee [0002]].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES T BOYLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, JAMIE ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/JAMES T BOYLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2486