DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 03/16/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Du fails to disclose “the first processor determines whether the first object is the first risk object according to at least one of conditions below: a moving speed of the first object; an object type of the first object; a travel direction of the first object; a predicted moving path of the first object; and a relative position of the first object.”
In support, Applicant states that “Du's system does not disclose or suggest such a selective risk determination mechanism,” “[t]he currently presented claims do not merely recite a general concept of ‘risk’; rather, they define the specific physical conditions (moving speed, object type, travel direction, predicted moving path, and relative position) that the first processor evaluates when making the risk determination” but “Du's system contains no corresponding evaluative step.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As set forth in Du, a safety message is created for transmission between vehicles (Du: [0051]-[0053]). This safety message is created based on “road users with information such as location, speed, direction, type, etc. (Du: [0051]). The vehicles in Du also determine predicted paths of nearby objects/obstacles (Du: [0039]; [0042]) and relative measurements of objects (Du: [0039]; [0051]). Thus Du discloses “the first processor determines whether the first object is the first risk object according to at least one of conditions below: a moving speed of the first object; an object type of the first object; a travel direction of the first object; a predicted moving path of the first object; and a relative position of the first object.”
In further support, Applicant states that “Du's object prediction module does not use these parameters to determine whether a detected object is a ‘risk object’ that warrants differential treatment in subsequent processing steps (i.e., selective generation of risk object information, transmission to the rear-vehicle terminal, and risk marking in the displayed image)” and “[a]ll detected objects in Du's obstacle map continue to be treated uniformly regardless of these predicted parameters.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Du’s safety message focuses on location, speed, direction, type, etc. (Du: [0051]), predicted paths of nearby objects/obstacles (Du: [0039]; [0042]) and relative measurements of objects (Du: [0039]; [0051]). These are safety parameters pertaining to risky objects, not merely “all objects.”
Applicant argues that Du fails to disclose “the first processor is further configured to transmit the first image to the rear-vehicle terminal via the inter-vehicle connection, and the second processor is further configured to identify a first area image in the first image according to a first relative position between the front vehicle and the rear vehicle, and stitch the first area image to the first see-through area in the displayed second image to cover an image originally displayed in the first see-through area.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Du images are sent, received and shared between vehicles (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0051]-[0058]). In Du Fig 5, the obstacle map is augmented so that one area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice, depending on relative positioning of rear, host vehicle to the rother vehicles, trucks and cars (Du: Fig 5; [0054]-[0056]). In Du Fig 6, truck 620 detected in the camera view from the host vehicle presented as translucent, and car 630 in front of truck 620, detected by the camera on a truck presented as solid, depending on relative positioning of rear, host vehicle to the rother vehicles, trucks and cars (Du: Fig 6; [0057]-[0058]). Thus Du discloses “the first processor is further configured to transmit the first image to the rear-vehicle terminal via the inter-vehicle connection, and the second processor is further configured to identify a first area image in the first image according to a first relative position between the front vehicle and the rear vehicle, and stitch the first area image to the first see-through area in the displayed second image to cover an image originally displayed in the first see-through area.”
Applicant argues that Du fails to disclose “in response to determining that a second target object among the one or more first target objects is not within the first see-through area: the second processor sets a second see-through area corresponding to the second target object in the second image in addition to the first see-through area, according to position information of the second target object, and the second processor stitches a second target object image to the second see-through area to cover an image originally displayed in the second see-through area.” In support, Applicant states that “Du's obstructed view 550 is a single region within which multiple vehicles happen to be located,” “Du Fig. 6 shows only a single, linear see-through scenario: truck 620” and “the Office's citation of Du paragraphs [0059]-[0060] and Fig. 8 is inapposite.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Du discloses multiple vehicles, 540 and 545, in obstructed view 550, which covers multiple different regions, and an augmented obstacle map (Du: Fig 5; [0055]-[0056]). This signifies multiple see through areas. Also, the see through area in Du Fig 6 contains road hazards 612, i.e. more than a single truck 620. Furthermore, since multiple augmented camera views from multiple other vehicles are stitched / presented in a solid manner, there are multiple see through areas containing cars / hazards / objects (Du: Fig 6, 8; [0057]-[0060]). Thus Du discloses “wherein in response to determining that a second target object among the one or more first target objects is not within the first see-through area: the second processor sets a second see-through area corresponding to the second target object in the second image in addition to the first see-through area, according to position information of the second target object, and the second processor stitches a second target object image to the second see-through area to cover an image originally displayed in the second see-through area.”
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: on lines 14-15, the limitation and “a relative position of the first object” is not followed by a comma or semicolon. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5 and 7-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Du et al. (US 2019/0052842).
Regarding claim 1,
Du discloses:
An inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system (Du: Fig 5-6; [0054]; [0057]) comprising:
a front-vehicle terminal arranged on a front vehicle and comprising a first processor, a first camera, and a first communication circuit device (Du: [0055]: vehicle 520, V2X system / DRSC system, which necessarily includes a processor; Fig 5; [0056]: cameras of multiple vehicles; [0057]: camera on truck 620, video transmitted via DSRC, which necessarily requires a processor; [0061]); and
a rear-vehicle terminal arranged on a rear vehicle and comprising a second processor, a second camera, and a display (Du: Fig 1; [0005]-[0006]: vehicle, processor, camera, display; [0024]; [0026]; Fig 5; [0054]: vehicle 510; [0057]; [0061]: host vehicle), wherein
the first camera is configured to capture a first image, the second camera is configured to capture a second image, and the display is configured to display the second image (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]; obstacle maps of local areas; camera and image in main/host vehicle displayed; image from main/host vehicle is displayed as part of birds eye / opaque), wherein the first image showing a view in front of the front-vehicle, and the second image showing another view in front of the rear-vehicle (Host vehicle in 510 in Du employs a 360 camera detection system including at least a forward facing / front view camera (Du: [0055]; [0057]-[0058]). Truck 620, which is in front of the host vehicle, captures forward facing images that are shown as solid, such as car 630, while forward facing images of the host vehicle are shown as translucent (Du: Fig 6; [0057]).),
the first processor determines whether the first object is the first risk object (Du: [0051]-[0053]; creation of safety message for transmission between vehicles) according to at least one of conditions below:
a moving speed of the first object (Du: [0051]); an object type of the first object (Du: [0051]); a travel direction of the first object (Du: [0051]); a predicted moving path of the first object (Du: [0039]; [0042]); and a relative position of the first object (Du: [0039]; [0051])
in response to determining that the one or more first objects in the first image comprise the one or more first risk objects, the first processor generates first risk object information corresponding to the one or more first risk objects, and transmits the first risk object information to the rear-vehicle terminal via an inter-vehicle connection between the front-vehicle terminal and the rear-vehicle terminal (Du: [0051]-[0053]; creation and transmission of safety message between vehicles; [0055]-[0058]; obstacle map / objects / road markers / road hazards sent from proximate vehicle / vehicle 520 / truck 620 to first vehicle 510), wherein the second processor determines whether one or more first target objects among the one or more first risk objects are not one or more second objects in the second image (The Du augmented obstacle map / augmented obstacle information constructed and displayed in first vehicle 510 shows objects detected by other vehicles as a different color or some other distinguishing attribute. (Du: Fig 5; [0055]-[0056]). Images from the host vehicle are displayed in an translucent manner, while augmented camera views from other vehicles displayed in a solid manner, such as car 630 as solid (Du: Fig 6; [0057]). Upon the host vehicle determining that objects from other vehicles, i.e. first objects in the first image, are not visible from the host vehicle cameras, i.e. not second objects in the second image, it constructs an image / map with these objects from the other vehicles depicted as distinguished / solid (Du: Fig 5-6; [0055]-[0057]). The augmented obstacle map / image is from the host vehicle’s perspective and is constructed at the host vehicle (Du: Fig 5-6; [0055]-[0058]).), and
in response to determining that the one or more first target objects among the one or more first risk objects are not the one or more second objects in the second image, the second processor marks the one or more first target objects in the displayed second image according to the first risk object information to warn of risks that are not visible in a field of view of the rear vehicle (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]; augmented obstacle map / augmented obstacle information displayed in first vehicle 510; augmented obstacle map shows objects detected by other vehicles as a different color or some other distinguishing attribute; augmented obstacle map shows areas of obstructed view 550; host vehicle display in an translucent manner, with augmented camera views from other vehicles displayed in a solid manner; car 630 and hazards 612 as solid), wherein one of the one or more second objects is a front-vehicle object corresponding to the front vehicle (Du: [0034]; [0036]; [0051]; [0054]-[0058]; Fig 3, 5-6, 8),
wherein the second processor determines whether the one or more second objects comprise one or more second risk objects, and marks the one or more second risk objects in the displayed second image (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]; Du discloses creating an obstacle map around host vehicle 510 that includes vehicles 520, 530 and 535 (Du: Fig 5; [0055]). Du also augments the obstacle map so that areas of obstructed view 550 are indicated to provide a user notice (Du: Fig 5; [0056]). Furthermore, Du discloses that truck 620, detected by host vehicle 510, is displayed as translucent, with the level of transparency being adjustable (Du: Fig 6; [0057]; claim 8-9, 13, 15-17, 19). Du detects obstacles, augments the obstacle map and adjusts the transparency level).
wherein the second processor further sets a first see-through area corresponding to the front vehicle in the second image according to the front-vehicle object (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]; one of vehicles 540 and 545 in obstructed view 550; augmented the obstacle map so that one area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice; truck 620 detected in the camera view from the host vehicle presented as translucent, and car 630 in front of truck 620, detected by the camera on a truck presented as solid),
the first processor is further configured to transmit the first image to the rear-vehicle terminal via the inter-vehicle connection (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0051]-[0058]; images are sent/received/shared between vehicles), and
the second processor is further configured to identify a first area image in the first image according to a first relative position between the front vehicle and the rear vehicle, and stitch the first area image to the first see-through area in the displayed second image to cover an image originally displayed in the first see-through area (Du: [0005]-[0007]; Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]; one of vehicles 540 and 545 in obstructed view 550; augmented the obstacle map so that one area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice; truck 620 detected in the camera view from the host vehicle presented as translucent, and car 630 in front of truck 620, detected by the camera on a truck presented as solid; image placements of these vehicles/trucks/cars depends on relative position to rear/host vehicle),
wherein in response to determining that a second target object among the one or more first target objects is not within the first see-through area (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0060]; the other of vehicles 540 and 545 in obstructed view 550; augmented the obstacle map so that another area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice; Du discloses multiple vehicles, 540 and 545, in obstructed view 550 and an augmented obstacle map (Du: Fig 5; [0055]-[0056]). This signifies multiple see through areas; since multiple augmented camera views from multiple other vehicles are stitched / presented in a solid manner, there are multiple see through areas (Du: Fig 6, 8; [0057]-[0060])):
the second processor sets a second see-through area corresponding to the second target object in the second image in addition to the first see-through area, according to position information of the second target object (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0055]-[0060]; the other of vehicles 540 and 545 in obstructed view 550; augmented the obstacle map so that another area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice; Du discloses multiple vehicles, 540 and 545, in obstructed view 550 and an augmented obstacle map (Du: Fig 5; [0055]-[0056]). This signifies multiple see through areas; car 630 and hazards 612 each in their own area; also, since multiple augmented camera views from multiple other vehicles are stitched / presented in a solid manner, there are multiple see through areas (Du: Fig 6, 8; [0057]-[0060])), and
the second processor stitches a second target object image to the second see-through area to cover an image originally displayed in the second see-through area (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0056]-[0060]; the other of vehicles 540 and 545 in obstructed view 550; augmented the obstacle map so that another area of obstructed view 550 is indicated to provide a user notice; Du discloses multiple vehicles, 540 and 545, in obstructed view 550 and an augmented obstacle map (Du: Fig 5; [0055]-[0056]). This signifies multiple see through areas; car 630 image and hazards 612 images each in their own area; also, since multiple augmented camera views from multiple other vehicles are stitched / presented in a solid manner, there are multiple see through areas containing cars / hazards / objects (Du: Fig 6, 8; [0057]-[0060])).
Regarding claim 2,
Du discloses:
The inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system according to claim 1, wherein
the first processor is configured to perform a first object recognition operation on the first image to identify the one or more first objects in the first image (Du: [0034]; [0036]; [0051]; [0054]-[0058]; Fig 3, 5-6, 8), and
the second processor further performs a second object recognition operation on the second image to identify the one or more second objects in the second image (Du: [0034]; [0036]; [0051]; [0054]-[0058]; Fig 3, 5-6, 8).
Regarding claim 4,
Du discloses:
The inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system according to claim 2, wherein the first risk object information comprises:
location information respectively corresponding to the one or more first risk objects (Du: [0036]; [0039]-[0040]; [0042]; [0051]; [0055]-[0057]) and
first risk object images respectively corresponding to the one or more first risk objects (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 5,
Du discloses:
The inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system according to claim 4, wherein in the marking the one or more first target objects in the displayed second image according to the first risk object information,
the second processor determines a first position in the displayed second image to which the one or more first target objects are respectively mapped according to the first risk object information, and displays one or more first marks corresponding to the one or more first target objects in the displayed second image according to the first position (Du: Fig 5-6, 8; [0054]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 7,
Du discloses:
The inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system according to claim 1, wherein the second processor sets the first see-through area corresponding to the front vehicle in the second image according to at least one of conditions below:
an image area of the front-vehicle object (Du: Fig 6; [0057]); and
an object contour of the front-vehicle object (Du: Fig 6; [0057]).
Regarding claim 8,
Du discloses:
The inter-vehicle communication see-through warning system according to claim 1, wherein in the identifying the first area image in the first image according to the first relative position between the front vehicle and the rear vehicle and stitching the first area image to the first see-through area in the displayed second image,
the second processor obtains an area and a shape of the first area image in the first image based on a projection algorithm according to the first relative position and an area and a shape of the first see-through area (Du: Fig 6; [0057]), and
the second processor stitches the obtained first area image to the first see-through area in the second image (Du: Fig 6; [0057]).
Regarding claim 10, Du discloses the method limitations of this claim as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JAMES M PONTIUS whose telephone number is (571)270-7687. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-4.
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, Sath V Perungavoor can be reached on (571)272-7455. 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 M PONTIUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights