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
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on 11/5/2025. Claims 1 and 3-5 are amended. Claims 6-14 are new. Claims 1-14 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
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 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 1-2 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 20180074502 A1, hereinafter “Holben”, NPL document Left- and right-hand traffic, hereinafter “Wikipedia”, US 20220402492 A1, hereinafter “Sakakura”, JP 2020071790 A, hereinafter “Yamanaka”, and JP 2009301267 A, hereinafter “Higa”.
Regarding claim 1, Holben, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, discloses A driving support device that supports driving of a vehicle when the vehicle turns at an intersection (See Abstract, the method determines whether to perform a turn, i.e. supports driving when the vehicle turns. See [0005], the method is implemented on a processor, i.e. a device. See Figs. 4A, 4B, 4C, and [0065]-[0067], the device supports driving of the vehicle at an intersection.), the driving support device comprising:
a display unit that displays information related to driving support of the vehicle (See [0045], the vehicle comprises a touch-screen display, i.e. display unit, used in connection with a navigation system, navigation systems inherently displaying information related to driving support of a vehicle.);
a front camera unit that takes an image of an area in front of the vehicle (See [0045], the system comprises a forward-facing camera taking an image of an area in front of the vehicle.);
an electronic control unit (ECU) comprising a processor and a memory (See [0034]-[0035], the invention can be implemented with memory and processor), and including a traffic light identifying unit
wherein the traffic light identifying unit, implemented by the ECU, identifies, based on the image taken by the front camera, a traffic light to be obeyed and installed at the intersection (See [0021], the system includes a traffic light monitoring module that determines a relevant traffic signal for the vehicle the lane is occupying, i.e. a traffic light to be obeyed. This inherently comprises identifying the traffic light. The light information is provided to the intersection state machine. See [0013], the intersection state machine analyzes the intersection, indicating the traffic light is at the intersection.).
Holben does not explicitly disclose for left-hand traffic when the vehicle turns right; the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a right turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the right turn in the intersection; the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit. Disclosure from Wikipedia, in the same field of endeavor, renders obvious for left-hand traffic when the vehicle turns right (See page 1 paragraph 2, 75 countries and territories use left-hand traffic.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for left turn assistance in right-hand traffic disclosed by Holben to include right turn assistance in left-hand traffic, as suggested by Wikipedia. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow assistance in turning across oncoming traffic in the large number of areas that use left-hand traffic, as suggested by Wikipedia at page 1 paragraph 2.
Holben combined with Wikipedia does not explicitly disclose the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a right turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the right turn in the intersection; the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit.
Sakakura, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, renders obvious the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a right turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the right turn in the intersection (See [0042], the controller recognizes a traffic light controlling the traffic on a lane the vehicle travels in, i.e. a traffic light to be obeyed. The controller causes the vehicle to stop in accordance with the indication on the recognized traffic light, which inherently comprises identification of a stop zone. See Fig. 10 and [0121]-[0122], the system determines a stop position that allows visibility of the traffic light in front of the vehicle that is before the stop line. It is further stated that the vehicle cannot travel further forward than the stop line corresponding to the stop light before recognizing the state of the traffic light. This indicates that the system chooses a stop position fits within the imaging range of the front imaging unit that is before a stop position farthest point, i.e. the stop line. The control amount setting unit sets the target stop position and is therefore a stop position determination unit.); and the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit (See [0132]-[0133], the route generation unit generates a target travel track and speed profile causing the vehicle to stop at the target stop position. The vehicle control unit controls the vehicle to travel according to the determined route. The combination of route generation unit and vehicle control unit are therefore a travel control unit.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben and Wikipedia to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera Sakakura. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004].
Holben combined with Wikipedia and Sakura does not explicitly disclose the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit. Yamanaka, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, renders obvious the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit (See Figs. 3B, 3C, and page 4 paragraph 3-page 5 paragraph 2, the unit identifies a traffic unit to be obeyed, extracts the light color information, and renders an image of the traffic light to be obeyed. This occurs while the vehicle is stopped behind a large truck at an intersection. The image is displayed, indicating a display control unit is present.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, and Sakakura to include the display of the traffic light and its information of Yamanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be informed of traffic signals they could not see otherwise, as suggested by Yamanaka at page 5 paragraph 2.
Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakura, and Yamanaka not explicitly disclose when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more.
Higa renders obvious when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more (See page 2 paragraph 6-8, the invention determines whether driving behavior matches driving information relating to a detected sign or road marking. The driver is alerted if the vehicle operation does not match the corresponding sign. It would be obvious to combine the teaching of alerting the user if they do not match the expected behavior with the teaching of determining a specific stopping position of Sakura and alerting the user of information by display of the traffic light of Yamanaka.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Yamanaka to include alerting the driver, specifically by means of display, if their behavior does not match that expected at the corresponding light, specifically the determined parking spot of Sakura, as suggested by Higa. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle can be alerted to traffic signals they may miss, as suggested by Higa at Abstract.
Regarding claim 2, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Yamanaka renders obvious wherein the display control unit causes the display unit to highlight the traffic light to be obeyed (See Figs. 3B, 3C, and page 4 paragraph 3-page 5 paragraph 2, the unit identifies a traffic unit to be obeyed, extracts the light color information, and renders an image of the traffic light to be obeyed. The rendered image shown in Fig. 3C shows the light information of the sign while having removed the surrounding information not relevant to the traffic directions indicated by the light, such as the background and pole. Examiner asserts that this is highlighting of the traffic unit to be obeyed.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Higa to include the display and highlighting of the traffic light and its information of Yamanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be informed of traffic signals they could not see otherwise, as suggested by Yamanaka at page 5 paragraph 2.
Regarding claim 10, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Higa renders obvious wherein the specified amount is 2 m in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and 0.5 m in a width direction of the vehicle (See page 2 paragraph 6-8, the invention determines whether driving behavior matches driving information relating to a detected sign or road marking. The driver is alerted if the vehicle operation does not match the corresponding sign. It would be obvious to combine the teaching of alerting the user if they do not match the expected behavior with the teaching of determining a specific stopping position of Sakura and alerting the user of information by display of the traffic light of Yamanaka.
The specified amount of 2m in the longitudinal direction and .5m in the width direction represents a non-trivial part of a passenger car’s dimensions. Any range satisfying this property would be obvious to try, so that the deviation from the spot permitted would be large enough not to cause pointless alerts and small enough to ensure that the vehicle is substantially in the identified stop location. There is no evidence that the specific amount claimed is critical to the invention. One of ordinary skill in the art could therefore arrive at this particular range through routine optimization.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Yamanaka to include alerting the driver, specifically by means of display, if their behavior does not match that expected at the corresponding light, specifically the determined parking spot of Sakura, as suggested by Higa. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle can be alerted to traffic signals they may miss, as suggested by Higa at Abstract.
Regarding claim 11, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Sakakura renders obvious determines the stop position based on the imaging range of the front camera and an installation position of the traffic light in the intersection (See [0042], the controller recognizes a traffic light controlling the traffic on a lane the vehicle travels in, i.e. a traffic light to be obeyed. The controller causes the vehicle to stop in accordance with the indication on the recognized traffic light, which inherently comprises identification of a stop zone. See Fig. 10 and [0121]-[0122], the system determines a stop position that allows visibility of the traffic light in front of the vehicle that is before the stop line. It is further stated that the vehicle cannot travel further forward than the stop line corresponding to the stop light before recognizing the state of the traffic light. This indicates that the system chooses a stop position fits within the imaging range of the front imaging unit that is before a stop position farthest point, i.e. the stop line. The control amount setting unit sets the target stop position and is therefore a stop position determination unit.
The area where the vehicle camera can view the light, i.e. imaging enabled area, is necessarily based on the imaging range of the camera and the installation position of the traffic light.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Yamanaka, and Higa to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera Sakakura. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004].
Regarding claim 12, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Sakakura renders obvious the stop position determination unit determines an orientation of the vehicle such that a field of view of the front camera for recognizing the traffic light is maintained while reducing a blind spot caused by an oncoming vehicle (See Fig. 3 and [0060]-[0073], the system comprises an object detection unit that detects a plurality of objects in the area. The output of the object detection unit is used by the preceding vehicle detection unit to detect preceding vehicles that could block the camera of the ego vehicle from viewing the traffic light. It would be obvious to try, with a reasonable chance of success, not specifically excluding oncoming vehicles detected by the object detection unit and object tracking unit and using their detection values along with the preceding vehicle information for the shielding avoidance control unit.);
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Yamanaka, and Higa to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera Sakakura, without specifically excluding oncoming vehicles detected by the object detection and object tracking units from use in determining the possible viewing area of the traffic light. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004] and [0065]-[0067].
Regarding claim 13, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Sakakura renders obvious determines the stop position based on a possibility that the traffic light to be obeyed is blocked by an oncoming vehicle (See Fig. 2 and [0047]-[0053], the system determines the area where the traffic light is expected to be visible from the vehicle camera if the angle of view of the camera is not shielded by a preceding vehicle. If the vehicle is in the area where the light should be visible to the camera is not visible, the controller determines a position that should allow the light to be visible, i.e. determines the stop position based on the possibility that the preceding vehicle is blocking the light.
See Fig. 3 and [0060]-[0073], the system comprises an object detection unit that detects a plurality of objects in the area. The output of the object detection unit is used by the preceding vehicle detection unit to detect preceding vehicles that could block the camera of the ego vehicle from viewing the traffic light. It would be obvious to try, with a reasonable chance of success, not specifically excluding oncoming vehicles detected by the object detection unit and object tracking unit and using their detection values along with the preceding vehicle information for the shielding avoidance control unit.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Yamanaka, and Higa to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera Sakakura, without specifically excluding oncoming vehicles detected by the object detection and object tracking units from use in determining the possible viewing area of the traffic light. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004] and [0065]-[0067].
Regarding claim 14, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Sakakura renders obvious the stop position determination unit determines the stop position farthest point based on an image captured by the front camera, the stop position farthest point being a farthest point at which the vehicle can wait for a right turn in the intersection without blocking a course of an oncoming vehicle (See Fig. 10 and [0121]-[0122], the system determines a stop position that allows visibility of the traffic light to the camera, i.e. based on the image captured by the front camera, in front of the vehicle that is before the stop line. It is further stated that the vehicle cannot travel further forward than the stop line corresponding to the stop light before recognizing the state of the traffic light. This indicates that the system chooses a stop position fits within the imaging range of the front imaging unit that is before a stop position farthest point, i.e. the stop line. The stop line is the furthest point at which a vehicle in a right-turning lane at an intersection can wait without blocking the course of oncoming vehicles. See [0034], the system can be applied at an intersection. It would be obvious not to specifically exclude right-turning lanes from use with the system.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera and before the stop line of Sakakura. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004].
Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa in further view of US 20190161010 A1, hereinafter “Repale”.
Regarding claim 3, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose wherein the display control unit causes the display unit to display the image of the area in front of the vehicle, the image being taken and obtained by the front camera. Repale, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, discloses wherein the display control unit causes the display unit to display the image of the area in front of the vehicle, the image being taken and obtained by the front camera (See Abstract, cameras capture an image of the front of the vehicle, which inherently comprises the area in front of the vehicle. A processed version of the image is displayed. See Figs 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, and [0015]-[0018], the processed versions of the image comprise the area in front of the vehicle.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa to include displaying the image of the area in front of the vehicle Repale. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because capturing and displaying the image in front of the vehicle allows for processing that can improve visibility and allow highlighting of important objects, thereby facilitating driver awareness, as suggested by Repale at [0005]-[0007].
Regarding claim 8, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Yamanaka renders obvious the image including the traffic light to be obeyed (See Figs. 3B, 3C, and page 4 paragraph 3-page 5 paragraph 2, the unit identifies a traffic unit to be obeyed, extracts the light color information, and renders an image of the traffic light to be obeyed. This occurs while the vehicle is stopped behind a large truck at an intersection. The image is displayed, indicating a display control unit is present.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Higa to include the display of the traffic light and its information of Yamanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be informed of traffic signals they could not see otherwise, as suggested by Yamanaka at page 5 paragraph 2.
Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose display an image captured by the front camera in augmented reality.
Repale renders obvious display an image captured by the front camera in augmented reality (See Abstract, cameras capture an image of the front of the vehicle, which inherently comprises the area in front of the vehicle. A processed version of the image is displayed. See Figs 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, and [0015]-[0018], the processed versions of the image comprise the area in front of the vehicle. See [0023], the invention can be applied to an augmented reality HUD system.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa to include displaying the image of the area in front of the vehicle in an augmented reality HUD system of Repale. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because capturing and displaying the image in front of the vehicle allows for processing that can improve visibility and allow highlighting of important objects, thereby facilitating driver awareness, as suggested by Repale at [0005]-[0007].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa, in further view of US 20110063444 A1, hereinafter Okamoto.
Regarding claim 4, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Holben further discloses a front camera, the rear camera, and the side camera (See [0044], the sensor system comprises forward-facing, rear-facing, and side-facing cameras.). Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose wherein the display control unit causes the display unit to display a bird's-eye view image together with the imaging range of the front camera, the bird's-eye view image being obtained by synthesizing the images taken by the front camera, the rear camera, and the side camera.
Okamoto, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, discloses wherein the display control unit causes the display unit to display a bird's-eye view image together with the imaging range of the front camera, the bird's-eye view image being obtained by synthesizing the images taken by the front camera, the rear camera, and the side camera (See Fig. 3 and [0040]-[0042], the system comprises front, rear, and side cameras, i.e. imaging units. See [0043], imaging data from the four cameras is used to synthesize an overhead, i.e. bird’s-eye-view, image. See Fig. 5A, 5B, 5C, and [0063]-[0066], the system superimposes a frame corresponding to the second (rear) camera’s display range onto the overhead view. See [0067], a similar frame indicating the imaging range of the first, i.e. front, camera is created.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa to include displaying the birds-eye image, including the range of the camera corresponding to the travel direction of the vehicle, of Okamoto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve safety while driving the vehicle by allowing improved monitoring of the surroundings, as suggested by Okamoto at [0001]. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa.
Regarding claim 5, Holben, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, discloses A driving support device that supports driving of a vehicle for right-hand traffic when the vehicle turns left at an intersection (See Abstract, the method determines whether to perform a turn, i.e. supports driving when the vehicle turns. See [0005], the method is implemented on a processor, i.e. a device. See Figs. 4A, 4B, 4C, and [0065]-[0067], the device supports driving of the vehicle at an intersection. The vehicle is turning left across incoming traffic, indicating right-hand traffic.), the driving support device comprising:
a display unit that displays information related to driving support of the vehicle (See [0045], the vehicle comprises a touch-screen display, i.e. display unit, used in connection with a navigation system, navigation systems inherently displaying information related to driving support of a vehicle.);
a front camera unit that takes an image of an area in front of the vehicle (See [0045], the system comprises a forward-facing camera taking an image of an area in front of the vehicle.);
an electronic control unit (ECU) comprising a processor and a memory (See [0034]-[0035], the invention can be implemented with memory and processor), and including a traffic light identifying unit
wherein the traffic light identifying unit, implemented by the ECU, identifies, based on the image taken by the front camera, a traffic light to be obeyed and installed at the intersection (See [0021], the system includes a traffic light monitoring module that determines a relevant traffic signal for the vehicle the lane is occupying, i.e. a traffic light to be obeyed. This inherently comprises identifying the traffic light. The light information is provided to the intersection state machine. See [0013], the intersection state machine analyzes the intersection, indicating the traffic light is at the intersection.).
Holben does not explicitly disclose the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a right turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the right turn in the intersection; the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit.
Holben does not explicitly disclose the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a left turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the left turn in the intersection; the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit.
Sakakura, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, renders obvious the stop position determination unit, implemented by the ECU, determines a stop position such that, when a content of an aspect of the traffic light to be obeyed and identified by the traffic light identifying unit indicates a state in which a left turn is permitted, the traffic light to be obeyed fits within an imaging range of the front camera imaging unit at an area before a stop position farthest point for waiting for the left turn in the intersection (See [0042], the controller recognizes a traffic light controlling the traffic on a lane the vehicle travels in, i.e. a traffic light to be obeyed. The controller causes the vehicle to stop in accordance with the indication on the recognized traffic light, which inherently comprises identification of a stop zone. See Fig. 10 and [0121]-[0122], the system determines a stop position that allows visibility of the traffic light in front of the vehicle that is before the stop line. It is further stated that the vehicle cannot travel further forward than the stop line corresponding to the stop light before recognizing the state of the traffic light. This indicates that the system chooses a stop position fits within the imaging range of the front imaging unit that is before a stop position farthest point, i.e. the stop line. The control amount setting unit sets the target stop position and is therefore a stop position determination unit.); and the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit (See [0132]-[0133], the route generation unit generates a target travel track and speed profile causing the vehicle to stop at the target stop position. The vehicle control unit controls the vehicle to travel according to the determined route. The combination of route generation unit and vehicle control unit are therefore a travel control unit.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben to include the system for keeping the relevant traffic light in view of the camera Sakakura. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow visibility of the light, which can facility autonomous driving, as suggested by Sakakura at [0004].
Holben combined with Sakura does not explicitly disclose the travel control unit, implemented by the ECU, that controls the vehicle to travel to the stop position determined by the stop position determination unit; or the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit. Yamanaka, in the same field of endeavor and solving a related problem, renders obvious the display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causes the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front imaging unit (See Figs. 3B, 3C, and page 4 paragraph 3-page 5 paragraph 2, the unit identifies a traffic unit to be obeyed, extracts the light color information, and renders an image of the traffic light to be obeyed. This occurs while the vehicle is stopped behind a large truck at an intersection. The image is displayed, indicating a display control unit is present.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben and Sakakura to include the display of the traffic light and its information of Yamanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be informed of traffic signals they could not see otherwise, as suggested by Yamanaka at page 5 paragraph 2.
Holben combined with Sakura and Yamanaka not explicitly disclose when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more.
Higa renders obvious when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more (See page 2 paragraph 6-8, the invention determines whether driving behavior matches driving information relating to a detected sign or road marking. The driver is alerted if the vehicle operation does not match the corresponding sign. It would be obvious to combine the teaching of alerting the user if they do not match the expected behavior with the teaching of determining a specific stopping position of Sakura and alerting the user of information by display of the traffic light of Yamanaka.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Sakakura, and Yamanaka to include alerting the driver, specifically by means of display, if their behavior does not match that expected at the corresponding light, specifically the determined parking spot of Sakura, as suggested by Higa. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle can be alerted to traffic signals they may miss, as suggested by Higa at Abstract.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa, in further view of JP 2004295595 A, hereinafter Kaseyama.
Regarding claim 6, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Yamanaka renders obvious the display control unit further causes the display unit to display the traffic light (See Figs. 3B, 3C, and page 4 paragraph 3-page 5 paragraph 2, the unit identifies a traffic unit to be obeyed, extracts the light color information, and renders an image of the traffic light to be obeyed. This occurs while the vehicle is stopped behind a large truck at an intersection. The image is displayed, indicating a display control unit is present.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Higa to include the display of the traffic light and its information of Yamanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be informed of traffic signals they could not see otherwise, as suggested by Yamanaka at page 5 paragraph 2.
Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose an oncoming right-turning vehicle highlighted.
Kaseyama renders obvious an oncoming right-turning vehicle highlighted (See [0018], the display shows an oncoming vehicle. An oncoming vehicle is highlighted, i.e. relatively emphasized on the display.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa to highlighting an oncoming vehicle of Kaseyama. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the driver of the vehicle would be able to make correct decisions more quickly, as suggested by Kaseyama at [0015].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa, in further view of US 20140267263 A1, hereinafter Beckwith.
Regarding claim 7, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose display a range blocked by an oncoming right-turning vehicle.
Beckwith renders obvious display a range blocked by an oncoming right-turning vehicle (See Fig. 2, [0030]-[0033], Fig. 4, and [0041]-[0044], the path of the oncoming vehicle is displayed. See specifically [0042], the length of the path of the oncoming vehicle is dynamically calculated based on the time it will take the driver of the ego vehicle to make the left turn. This means the path represents the range blocked by the oncoming vehicle. It would be obvious to not specifically exclude oncoming vehicles turning right from use with this system.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa to show the oncoming vehicle paths based on the range they block of Beckwith. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to help the driver make left turns, as suggested by Beckwith at Abstract.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, and Higa, in further view of Repale and Beckwith.
Regarding claim 9, Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa renders obvious the limitations of claim 1. Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa does not explicitly disclose display, with the image captured by the front camera, a course along which the vehicle is scheduled to travel.
Repale renders obvious display, with the image captured by the front camera (See Abstract, cameras capture an image of the front of the vehicle, which inherently comprises the area in front of the vehicle. A processed version of the image is displayed. See Figs 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, and [0015]-[0018], the processed versions of the image comprise the area in front of the vehicle. See [0023], the invention can be applied to an augmented reality HUD system.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, and Higa to include displaying the image of the area in front of the vehicle of Repale. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because capturing and displaying the image in front of the vehicle allows for processing that can improve visibility and allow highlighting of important objects, thereby facilitating driver awareness, as suggested by Repale at [0005]-[0007].
Holben combined with Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanka, Higa, and Repale does not explicitly disclose display a course along which the vehicle is scheduled to travel.
Beckwith renders obvious display a course along which the vehicle is scheduled to travel (See Figs. 4-5 and [0041]-[0045], the system displays the left turn path of the ego vehicle, i.e. the course along which the vehicle is scheduled to travel, to the driver.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system for turn assistance at an intersection disclosed by Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, Higa, and Repale to show the scheduled left turn path of Beckwith. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to help the driver make left turns, as suggested by Beckwith at Abstract.
Response to Arguments
(A) Applicant argues “35 U.S.C. § 112(f)
The phrases that are identified by the Office not reciting sufficient structure are amended based on paragraphs [0016] and [0019] as suggested by the Office.
Although the term "processor" is not used verbatim, paragraph [0019] describes the ECU as comprising a CPU, RAM, and ROM. One skilled in the art would understand that a CPU is a processor and that RAM and ROM constitute memory. Accordingly, the feature "an ECU comprising a processor and memory" is supported by the specification.
In view of the foregoing, Applicant respectfully asserts that the claim interpretation under this section is no longer appropriate.”
As to (A), Examiner agrees that the amended claims do not require interpretation under 35 USC 112(f).
(B) Applicant argues “Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Holben (US 20180074502 Al), Wikipedia (NPL document Left- and right-hand traffic), Sakakura (US 20220402492 Al), and Yamanaka (JP 2020071790 A);
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Yamanaka, in further view of Rapale (US 20190161010 Al);
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, and Yamanaka, in further view of Okamoto (US 20110063444 Al); and
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Holben, Sakakura, and Yamanaka.
Amended claims 1 and 5 recites a driving support device comprising, inter alia, a display control unit, implemented by the ECU, causing the display unit to display, when the vehicle stops at the stop position and when the stop position of the vehicle deviates from the stop position farthest point by a specified amount or more, an image including at least the traffic light to be obeyed and recognized by the front camera.
The display control unit causes the display to show an image including at least the recognized traffic light only when the vehicle's stop position deviates from the farthest stop position by a specified amount or more. None of the cited references discloses or suggests such a threshold-based conditional trigger for displaying the specific image. Yamanaka always displays the image when the traffic light is obstructed, irrespective of positional deviation.
As such, without some teaching or suggestion, one skilled in the art would not have been motivated to investigate the cited art, much less to modify the cited art in the manner necessary to arrive at the present application.
In view of the foregoing, Applicant respectfully asserts that the present application would not have been made obvious over Holben, Wikipedia, Sakakura, Yamanaka, Rapale, and Okamoto, and requests that the rejection of the pending claims under this section be withdrawn.”
As to (B), Examiner does not find the argument persuasive. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2002104115 A which relates to an imaging system for a vehicle to monitor the driver’s blind spot for obstacles.
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 AUSTIN ROBERT CHENNAULT whose telephone number is (571)272-4606. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/AUSTIN ROBERT CHENNAULT/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
2/17/26