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 .
Upon further search and/or consideration, and after newly found prior art, a new Final Rejection is submitted herewith.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 18 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, and therefore, claim 18 is no longer considered allowable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 4, 7-10, 12-13, 18, 19, 21, 24, 28, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2023006618) in view of Yamano et al. (WO 2021192589).
As to claims 18, 19, and 21, Watanabe discloses a method of operating a user interface (Figs. 27-29) including computer program in a memory (Fig. 3C, 1108, 1109, 1170) comprising instructions executed by a processor (Fig. 3C, image control unit (1110, 1160)),for a vehicle(see paragraph 3 of the BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION), wherein the method comprises: displaying a virtual image in an image plane (Figs. 3A, 3B, 3C (3)) in an environment of the user interface (see Figs. 27-29) by emitting light in response to a control signal (Fig. 3C, (1110, 1160)), and displaying the virtual image on the basis of the emitted light(Figs. 3A, 3B, 3C (3)), the virtual image including a shape representative of a three-dimensional object (Fig. 6, and paragraph describing it), sensing a user input in relation to the image plane(Fig. 34, (1351)), and graphically adapting the virtual image (Figs. 27-29, (3) in response to the user input (Figs. 27-29, (virtual shadow (1510) display processing) to simulate interaction of the user with the three-dimensional object in dependence on a threshold condition relating to a distance between the image plane and the user input(Figs. 27A (dx1), 27B(dz1), 28A(dx2), 28B(dz2). Further, Watanable discloses graphically adapting the virtual image comprises at least one of the group consisting of a scaling of the virtual image, and a displacement of the virtual image (see Figs. 27-29, virtual shadow (1510): (“A virtual shadow 1510 simulating the shadow of the finger 210 formed by the light emitted from the virtual light source 1500 is displayed in the floating image 3 .In the example of FIGS. 27-29, virtual shadow 1510 is displayed to the left of finger 210 . This virtual shadow 1510 assists the user in performing a touch operation.”); and graphically adapt the virtual image (virtual shadow, (Figs. 27-29) (1510) in dependence on a threshold condition relating to a distance between the image plane and the user input (Figs. 27A (dx1), 27B(dz1), 28A(dx2), 28B(dz2).
However, further, Watanable does not specifically disclose graphically adapting the virtual image includes a distortion of the shape.
Analogous art Yamano discloses graphically adapting the virtual image includes a distortion of the shape (see Figs. 15, 18, and 23-25)(“ as the distance between the user's hand and the virtual object, three states of "approach", "contact", and "immersion" are defined. FIG. 15 shows three states of “approach”, “contact”, and “entry”. "Approach" is a state in which the shortest distance between the user's hand and the virtual object is equal to or less than a predetermined value. "Contact" is a state in which the shortest distance between the user's hand and the virtual object is zero. "Embedding" is a state in which the user's hand is interfering with the area of the virtual object”). The immersion or embedding causes a distortion of the shape. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to cause a distortion of the shape, as taught by Yamano, in the device of Watanabe, in order to control a display operation of a display device that overlays and displays a virtual object onto a real space (Abstract), thereby offering the user a more realistic, or real life, experience.
As to claims 4 and 7, Watanabe discloses, further, the data processing device is adapted to graphically adapt the virtual image in real-time as the user input is sensed (“In the state of FIG. 27(B), compared with the states of FIG. 28(B) and FIG. furthest away. Therefore, in FIG. 27A, the tip of the virtual shadow 1510 is the farthest in the horizontal direction from the first button BUT1 to be touched compared to the states of FIGS. 28A and 29A. formed at the position Therefore, in FIG. 27A, the horizontal distance between the tip of the finger 210 and the tip of the virtual shadow 1510 when the display surface 3a of the floating image 3 is viewed from the front is the state shown in FIG. Compared to the state of FIG. 29(A), it becomes the largest. In FIG. 27A, the distance between the tip of the finger 210 and the tip of the virtual shadow 1510 in the horizontal direction of the display surface 3a of the floating image 3 is dx1”).
As to claims 8-10, further, Watanabe discloses the sensing device is adapted to sense a position of the one or more fingers, and wherein the data processing device interprets the position and the movement as the user input.(“it is possible to detect not only the coordinates in the planar direction of the object but also the coordinates in the depth direction and the direction and speed of movement of the object”).
As to claim 12, further, Watanabe discloses the virtual image is context-related (see Figs. 27-29 and 37-39).
As to claim 13, further, Watanabe discloses the virtual image is dynamic or time-dependent (FIG. 27 shows the state at the first point in time when the user tries to touch the first button BUT1 on the display surface 3a of the floating image 3 with the finger 210, and FIG. 29 shows the state at the third point in time when the finger 210 touches the first button BUT1 on the display surface 3a of the floating image 3 in space”).
As to claim 24, further, Watanabe, discloses the virtual image is a floating image display (see Figs. 27-29b, and corresponding, respective, paragraphs).
As to claim 28, further, Watanabe, discloses the image plane is arranged within the vehicle so that a user setting in a seat of the vehicle may visually perceive the virtual image (see paragraph 3 of the BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION) (the spatially floating image is visible inside the vehicle so a user sitting inside the vehicle may visually perceive the virtual image).
As to claim 29, Watanabe, further, discloses sensing the user input using a camera (Fig. 3C, (1180)(“ The imaging unit 1180 is a camera having an image sensor, and images the space near the floating image 3 and/or the face, arms, fingers, etc. of the user 230”).
However, Watanable, further, does not specifically disclose the camera is an RGB camera.
Yamano discloses sensing the user input using an RGB camera (Fig. 8, (121). (“The outward-facing camera 121 is composed of, for example, an RGB camera, and is installed so as to photograph the outside of the AR glass, that is, the front direction of the user wearing the AR glass. The outward camera 121 can capture the operation of the user's fingers”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the RGB camera, as taught by Yamano, in the device of Watanabe, since RGB cameras are well known in the art of cameras as options with the benefits of color accuracy, image clarity, low-light performance, and versatility.
Claim(s) 23 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2023006618) in view of Yamano et al. (WO 2021192589) as applied to claims 18 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (CN 115503744).
As to claims 23, Watanabe, as anticipated by Yamano, further, does not specifically disclose altering additional vehicle operation based on the user input.
Wang discloses a vehicle having a virtual image having a vehicle operation based on the user input (see claim 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the vehicle virtual image to adjust vehicle operations, as taught by Wang, in the device of Watanabe and Yamano, since user input interfaces, of any kind, are well known to be used in a vehicle environment to control vehicle operations, to conveniently keep the eyes on the road and avoid distractions, while driving.
As to claim 27, Watanabe, as anticipated by Yamano, further, does not specifically disclose altering the additional vehicle operation including changing the temperature.
Wang discloses, further, changing the temperature (see claim 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the vehicle virtual image to change the temperature, as taught by Wang, in the device of Watanabe and Yamano, since it is well known in the art of vehicle operations to routinely control the temperature to drive in comfortable conditions.
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 RICARDO OSORIO whose telephone number is (571)272-7676. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5:30 PM.
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, LunYi Lao can be reached on 571-272-7671. 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.
/RICARDO OSORIO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619