Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/595,425

CONTROL DEVICE, CONTENT VIEWING CONTROL SYSTEM, MOVING OBJECT, CONTROL METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 05, 2024
Priority
Mar 09, 2023 — JP 2023-036809
Examiner
NGUYEN, PHUNG HOANG JOSEPH
Art Unit
2691
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
706 granted / 890 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
917
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
61.3%
+21.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 890 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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(s) 1-3, 8 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Otsuka in view in view of ABE et al (US 2022/0400343) OR Tanaka (US 2020/0103964) and further in view of Trestain. Claims 1, 19 and 20, Otsuka teaches a control device, a method and a medium for a display device installed in a moving object (the display apparatus 100 installed in the vehicle 200), wherein the display device comprises a first display mode in which content is displayed without dividing a display region, and a second display mode in which the display region is divided into a first display region for a first seat installed in the moving object and a second display region for a second seat within the moving object for displaying, and the control device (Figs. 3-19 wherein Fig. 3 shows necessary elements/components to control the system. Fig. 4 shows the splitting the screen where display screen 101 of wide panel 100 is split into a left part and a right part [0062-0070]) comprises: an obtaining module which obtains information indicating a display mode of the display device (Figs. 3-19 also show modes and can even be switched between the two as shown in Fig. 18. Fig. 17 shows user can enlarge a mode and with wide panel 100 of the present example, passengers 300A and 300B in backseat 203, who are relatively available, are able to, for example, search for the destinations, places for fueling or rest areas for driver 300C and transfer to and display search results on display screen 401 of navigation system 400, thereby providing valuable information for driver 300C, [0108]); Otsuka does not teach “a line-of-sight detection module which detects a line of sight of an occupant of the moving object”; Abe teaches, [0081, 0127-0130] The sight line recognition unit 112 recognizes a line of sight of an occupant appearing on a video, that is, a direction in which the occupant is looking at. The line of sight can be recognized by using a conventional technique, and therefore detailed descriptions thereof are omitted here. For example, the sight line recognition unit 112 recognizes a line of sight of an occupant using a sight line inference model for inferring the line of sight from video data on which the eye appears. The sight line inference model can be stored in the storage unit 16 or in another device communicably connected to the control device 1. Also Tanaka teaches, “[0016] causing a display provided in the vehicle cabin to display an agent image in a form of speaking to an occupant and causing a speaker which outputs audio to the vehicle cabin to output audio spoken by the agent image; and, when an image provided to the occupant is displayed on the display, generating an agent image for guiding the line of sight of the occupant to a display position of the provided image. [0017] (10): A storage medium according to another aspect of the present invention is a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium storing a program causing a computer of an agent apparatus to: collect audio in a vehicle cabin; recognize the meaning of the collected audio; cause a display provided in the vehicle cabin to display an agent image in a form of speaking to an occupant and cause a speaker which outputs audio to the vehicle cabin to output audio spoken by the agent image; and, when an image provided to the occupant is displayed on the display, generate an agent image for guiding the line of sight of the occupant to a display position of the provided image”. a control module which performs zoning of a space within the moving object to output audio, (when display screen 101 is split, with wide panel 100 of the present example, the audio volume outputs from left and right first speaker 500A and second speaker 500B can be changed in accordance with the screen split, with wide panel 100 of the present example, when display screen 101 is split, it is possible to increase the audio volume 101Av of the main image on the left side and decrease the audio volume 101Bv of the sub-image from speaker 500A on the left side, and increase the audio volume 101Bv of the sub-image on the right side and decrease the audio volume 101Av of the main image from speaker 500B on the right side, as shown in FIG. 16 while Fig. 17 shows with wide panel 100 of the present example, when first split screen 101A on the left side is larger than second split screen 101B on the right side, it is possible to increase the audio volume 101Av of first split screen 101A on the left side. Fig. 18 shows with wide panel 100 of the present example, when the display locations on display screen 101 of first split screen 101A and second split screen 101B after a screen spit are switched right and left, it is possible to switch audio 101A of the main image and audio 101Bv of the sub-image outputted from left and right speakers 500A and 500B in accordance with each other, [0127- 0134]), based on the line of sight of the occupant of the moving object detected by the line-of-sight detection module; (See ABE and Tanaka above). wherein the control module differentiates the zoning depending on whether the display mode of the display device is the first display mode or the second display mode. (See the previous step or Fig. 18 being schematic diagram for explaining the operation for switching the left and right speaker audio outputs upon switching the display locations of split images on split screens of a display apparatus left and right, with wide panel 100 of the present example, when the display locations on display screen 101 of first split screen 101A and second split screen 101B after a screen spit are switched right and left, it is possible to switch audio 101A of the main image and audio 101Bv of the sub-image outputted from left and right speakers 500A and 500B in accordance with each other, [0134]. Fig. 18 also shows the switching of audio volume control 101Av and 101Bv). Examiner notes that Otsuka does not use the term “zone/zoning”, but rather uses the term “seat” (i.e., driver's seat 201, passenger's seat 202, and backseat 203 of vehicle 200, [0036-0046]). Obviously, those seating areas are equivalent to the current term “zone/zoning”. To support this obviousness, Trestain teaches the same in Fig. 7-10. Therefore, it would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of ABE or Tanaka into the teaching of Otsuka for the purpose of providing a method to share audio between plurality of users in a simple manner in which the user only carries out the predetermined motion and also incorporate the teaching of Trestain into the teaching of Otsuka for the purpose of providing the explicitly relevant language/term to the current use of claim language to ensure that there is no dispute/confusion when carrying out the claimed invention. Claim 2. The control device of claim 1, wherein the control module, when the display mode of the display device is the first display mode, performs zoning of a space within the moving object into one zone, and when the display mode of the display device is the second display mode, performs zoning of the space within the moving object into a first zone corresponding to a position in which the first seat is installed and a second zone corresponding to a position in which the second seat is installed. (See the independent claims or Otsuka’s Fig. 2, first speaker 500A and second speaker 500B are arranged on both sides of backseat 203 of vehicle 200, [0040-0043]) Claim 3. The control device of claim 2, wherein the control module, when the display mode of the display device is the second display mode, controls to output audio such that audio of first content displayed on the first display region is able to be heard by an occupant located within the first zone, and controls to output audio such that audio of second content displayed on the second display region is able to be heard by an occupant located within the second zone. (See the independent claims or Otsuka’s FIG. 18 is a schematic diagram for explaining the operation for switching the left and right speaker audio outputs upon switching the display locations of split images on split screens of a display apparatus left and right when the display locations on display screen 101 of first split screen 101A and second split screen 101B after a screen spit are switched right and left, it is possible to switch audio 101A of the main image and audio 101Bv of the sub-image outputted from left and right speakers 500A and 500B in accordance with each other, [0134]). Claim 8. The control device of claim 1, further comprising: an occupant information detection module which detects at least one of a state or an attribute of an occupant of the moving object, wherein the control module, based on at least one of the state or the attribute of the occupant (Trestain: an occupants may wish to lower the non-speech sound, col. 12, line 51) detected by the occupant information detection module, further identifies an occupant who does not require audio to be output, and controls to suppress the audio to be output to a zone in which the identified occupant located. (Trestain: The volume may be adjusted to decrease to a predefined level. That is, the volume may decrease, but still be audible to the occupants. The volume may be completely muted. The playback may be paused completely. Additionally or alternatively, the volume may be faded down to a mute, or faded down to a predetermined level. The volume level may be predefined by the user, user preferences, etc., col. 13, lines 9-16). Claim 16. The control device of claim 1, wherein the moving object is a vehicle. (See the independent claims). Claim 17. A content viewing control system comprising: the control device of claim 1; and the display device. (See the independent claims). Claim 18. A moving object comprising the control device of claim 1. (See the independent claims). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 4-7, 9-15: are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 4/14/26 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. For example, applicant argues that Claim has been amended to more particularly define the claimed invention. Support for the amendments can be found, for example, in the original claim 4 of the specification as originally filed. Applicant respectfully submits that the cited references fail to teach, suggest, or otherwise render obvious the subject matter recited in the pending claims. For example, none of the references teach or fairly describe "a line-of-sight detection module which detects a line of sight of an occupant of the moving object," and "a control module which performs zoning of a space within the moving object to output audio, based on the line of sight of the occupant of the moving object detected by the line-of-sight detection module," as required by amended claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees as examiner has produced the new references to address the new amendment. Conclusion 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 PHUNG-HOANG J. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1949. The examiner can normally be reached Reg. Sched. 6:00-3:00. 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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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. /PHUNG-HOANG J NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Apr 01, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 14, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jul 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12701197
APPARATUSES, COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHODS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR GENERATING A COLLABORATIVE CONTEXTUAL SUMMARY INTERFACE IN ASSOCIATION WITH AN AUDIO-VIDEO CONFERENCING INTERFACE SERVICE
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12695830
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING THEMES IN INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688006
HEIRARCHICAL PRIORITY ALERT DUCKER MATRIX
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12681986
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12684221
VIDEO MANAGEMENT IN A CONFERENCE ROOM USING A VIDEO BAR
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.9%)
2y 8m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 890 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month