DETAILED ACTION
This is a response to Applicant’s submissions filed on 12/19/2025. Claims 1-5 and 7-10 are pending.
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 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the limitation “present … a virtual image corresponding to the display image in front of the display medium” clearly describes presenting the display image as though it were floating over the vehicle’s hood as depicted in figure 1 (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 13), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is unclear where the front of the display medium is. See rejection below.
In response to Applicant’s argument that Van Roekel is entirely silent in regard to the direction of the vehicle estimated being based on sensor information output from a gyroscope sensor (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 17), it is noted that Van Roekel is not relied upon to disclose determining the vehicle’s direction using a gyroscope, it is the combination of Ohta with Van Roekel that discloses determining the vehicle’s direction using a gyroscope. See rejection below.
In response to Applicant’s argument that Van Roekel is entirely silent in regard to the current location of the vehicle being output from a navigation device (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 17), it is noted that Van Roekel is not relied upon to disclose a navigation device outputting the current location of the vehicle, it is the combination of Ohta with Van Roekel that discloses outputting the current location of the vehicle. See rejection below.
In response to Applicant’s argument that Van Roekel is entirely silent in regard to Van Roekel’s route direction being a direction of a tangent at a route point corresponding to the current location of the vehicle on the route (Applicant’s Remarks; p. 17), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Each of the travel direction of Ohta (Ohta; para. 75), the user heading of Lauro (Lauro; col. 3, ll. 55-63), and the longitudinal direction of Van Roekel (Van Roekel; col. 6, ll. 57-60) independently disclose a route direction that is a direction of a tangent at a route point corresponding to a current location on a route. It is noted that although the combination of Ohta and Lauro inherently discloses a route direction that is tangent to the route at the vehicle’s location, the figures of Van Roekel explicitly disclose a route direction that is tangent to a curved route. See rejection below.
Drawings
The amended drawings received on 12/19/2025 are acceptable.
Specification
The amendments to the specification were received on 12/19/2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 should be limited to a single colon, because using multiple colons in a single sentence is grammatically incorrect, which makes it difficult to determine the hierarchical relationships between limitations.
In claim 3, line 2, it is unclear what the dead zone angle is determined to be larger than. It appears that the claim should recite increasing the dead zone angle when the number of lanes increase.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, lines 5-6, the limitation “a virtual image corresponding to the display image in front of the display medium” renders each claim indefinite because the display image is projected to a display medium, therefore, it is unclear how the virtual image corresponds to the display image in front of the display medium. It is further unclear whether the front of the display medium is oriented towards or away from the driver. Page 7, lines 20-22, disclose the display image appears to the driver as if it were displayed in space in front of the windshield, and figure 3 depicts the display image as though it were located outside of the vehicle and viewed through the windshield. Therefore, for the purposes of examination, it will be assumed that the virtual image presented to the user depicts the display image such that is appears to be farther away from the driver than the display medium.
Regarding claim 4, line 3, The term “larger” in the limitation “the dead zone angle is determined to be larger” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, it will be assumed that the dead zone angle is increased at a curve, a fork, or a junction, relative to the dead zone angle at a straight section of the route without a fork or a junction.
Claims 2-5 and 8-10 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim and for failing to cure the deficiencies listed above.
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) 1-2, 5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohta et al. (US 2010/0082234), hereinafter Ohta, in view of Van Roekel (US 6,127,969), Lauro et al. (US 5,173,709) and DE 10 2006 005 571, hereinafter Lauro and Siemens, respectively.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, as best understood, Ohta discloses a display system provided to a vehicle, the display system comprising: a display that projects light representing a display image to a display medium of the vehicle, to present, to a user, a virtual image (Ohta; para. 226: the two-dimensional image of the indicator may be projected on a windshield glass by a head-up display installed in a dashboard); a processor; and a memory including at least set of instructions that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform operations (Ohta; para. 54: robot controller 200 comprises a ROM (Read Only Memory) 201 for storing programs to execute control processes of the robot 100, a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 202 as operational circuits to function as the robot controller by executing the programs stored in the ROM), the operations including: drawing the display image for guiding the vehicle to a destination (Ohta; para. 223: The image display controller stores movie data of the indicator indicating a predefined direction and displays the indicator indicating the target direction based on the presentation command.); and estimating a direction of the vehicle based on sensor information output from a gyroscope sensor (Ohta; para. 83: The travel direction θ' of the subject vehicle is acquired from the gyro sensor 401 and the geomagnetic sensor 402 of the vehicle controller 400.), calculating a difference angle between a route direction at a current location of the vehicle on a route that is set for guiding the vehicle to the destination and the direction of the vehicle estimated (Ohta; fig. 8; para. 83: The target angle α that is to be a facing angle of the robot 100 is calculated using the following equation 5 based on the absolute angle θ of the target (POI) on the basis of the current position of the subject vehicle and the travel direction θ' of the subject vehicle.), and the current location of the vehicle being output from a navigation device (Ohta; para. 58: robot controller 200 acquires the current position of the vehicle and the reference direction of the vehicle from the navigation device).
Ohta does not explicitly disclose when the difference angle between a route direction at a current location of the vehicle on a route that is set for guiding the vehicle to the destination and the direction of the vehicle estimated is less than a threshold, the display displays the display image pointing in a first direction along the route as the virtual image, and when the difference angle is greater than or equal to the threshold, the display displays the display image pointing in a second direction obtained by correcting the first direction as the virtual image.
Lauro, in the same field of endeavor (navigation devices), discloses when a difference angle (Lauro; col. 3, ll. 55-63: To develop a signal which represents the direction of the desired destination relative to the user's heading … Angle A is subtracted from Angle B to produce Angle C on lead 60. The signal representing Angle C is the "direction signal" that causes the pointer 16 to point in the direction of the user's desired destination, irrespective of the user's heading.) between a route direction at a current location on a route that is set for guiding to a destination (Lauro; col. 3, ll. 26-29: Angle B represents the bearing angle (relative to north) from the user's present location to the location of the selected waypoint) and a direction estimated (Lauro; col. 3, ll. 52-54: generation of a signal (identified as Angle A) on lead 56 that represents the heading of the user with respect to true north) is less than a threshold, a display displays a display image pointing in a first direction along a route as a virtual image, and when the difference angle is greater than or equal to the threshold, the display displays the display image pointing in a second direction obtained by correcting the first direction as the virtual image (Lauro; col. 5, ll. 9-14: The appropriate arrowhead for the pointer is determined by the microprocessor by finding the value of (C×2L+360), where C is the value of Angle C. The result (which can vary from 0-15) is rounded to the nearest integer which identifies the arrowhead to activate.; col. 4, l. 64: L is the number of line segments [therefore, a first pointer is displayed when the difference angle is less than half of the angle between line segments of the display, and a second pointer is displayed when the difference angle is greater than or equal to half of the angle between line segments]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to represent the approximate direction to a desired destination using a segmented circular display, as disclosed by Lauro, on the head-up display of Ohta, with the motivation of allowing a user to quickly determine the direct route to a desired destination thereby improving navigation ease of use (Lauro; col. 5, ll. 34-42).
Ohta, as modified, does not explicitly disclose the route direction at the current location of the vehicle is a direction of a tangent at a route point corresponding to the current location of the vehicle on the route, and the first direction is a direction of a tangent at a route point located ahead of the current location of the vehicle on the route.
Van Roekel, in the same field of endeavor (vehicle navigation devices), discloses a route direction at the current location of a vehicle is a direction of a tangent at a route point corresponding to the current location of the vehicle on the route (Van Roekel; col. 7, ll. 17-20: FIG. 4 shows the course of a travel route 30 which includes a sharp curve 30a to the left. The vehicle is situated in the instantaneous vehicle position 31 preceding the left curve 30a [when the vehicle is positioned on the travel route the route direction is tangent to the travel route (see fig. 4)].), and a first direction is a direction of a tangent at a route point located ahead of the current location of the vehicle on the route (Van Roekel; col. 7, ll. 39-42: The instantaneous vehicle position 31 is associated with a display screen indication 33 which is intended to be displayed on the optical display module 7 of FIG. 1. The display screen indication 33 comprises a first direction indication 34 and a straight-ahead arrow 35 as a second direction indication … On the basis of the first direction indication 34, however, the driver can ascertain that he or she should follow the left curve 30a and not continue straight ahead on the non-digitized secondary road 32. [when the vehicle is at position 31, direction indication 33 points in a direction tangent to upcoming curve 30a (see fig. 4)]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to indicate a direction tangent to an upcoming point on the route with respect to the vehicle's current position, as disclosed by Van Roekel, in the controller of Ohta, as modified, With the motivation of informing a user how to proceed in the case of ambiguous situations (Van Roekel; col. 4, ll. 11-14) thereby enabling reliable, simple and unambiguous display of direction information (Van Roekel; col. 1, ll. 47-48).
Although Ohta, as modified, discloses projecting a direction indicator onto a windshield using a head-up display (Ohta; para. 226) and as a three-dimensional virtual image using a holographic display device (Ohta; paras. 209-210), Ohta, as modified, does not appear to explicitly disclose the virtual image corresponds to the display image in front of the display medium.
However, Siemens, in the same field of endeavor (head-up navigation displays), discloses a virtual image corresponds to a display image in front of a display medium (Siemens; para. 15: if an arrow is displayed by means of the light valve 4, the driver K may perceive a virtual arrow that appears to float over the front part of the motor vehicle … This can then control the head-up display in such a way that the image captured by infrared sensor 8 is perceptible to the driver as a virtual image).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the image presented on the head-up display by the image display controller of Ohta, as modified, to appear as though it were floating over the front part of the motor vehicle, as disclosed by Siemens, to yield the predictable result of providing information to the driver while their vision is focused on the upcoming road.
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses the second direction is obtained by correcting the first direction by an angle that results from subtracting a dead zone angle from the difference angle (Lauro; col. 5, ll. 9-16: The appropriate arrowhead for the pointer is determined by the microprocessor by finding the value of (C×2L+360), where C is the value of Angle C. The result (which can vary from 0-15) is rounded to the nearest integer [rounding down is equivalent to subtracting the fractional portion of angle C] which identifies the arrowhead to activate.).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses in a case in which the difference angle is greater than or equal to the threshold, the processor changes a display state of the display image when the first direction is corrected to the second direction (Lauro; col. 5, ll. 9-14: The appropriate arrowhead for the pointer is determined by the microprocessor by finding the value of (C×2L+360), where C is the value of Angle C. The result (which can vary from 0-15) is rounded to the nearest integer which identifies the arrowhead to activate.; col. 4, l. 64: L is the number of line segments [therefore, a first pointer is displayed when the difference angle is less than half of the angle between line segments of the display, and a second pointer is displayed when the difference angle is greater than or equal to half of the angle between line segments]).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses a distance from the current location of the vehicle to the route point located ahead of the current location of the vehicle on the route (Van Roekel; col. 6, l. 55 to col. 7, l. 6: A remote point 17 is situated along the travel route 13 at a forward distance 16 from the instantaneous vehicle position 14. An arrow 18, representing the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, extends in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle 15. An arrow 19, indicating the direction of the remote point, extends from the instantaneous vehicle position 14 to the remote point 17. The arrow 18, representing the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, and the arrow 19, indicating the direction of the remote point, enclose a remote point direction angle .phi..sub.D relative to one another. For this instantaneous vehicle position 14 and its associated remote point 17 there is provided a first direction indication 20 in the form of a compass needle 21. This first direction indication 20 is reproduced on the optical output module 7 of the output device 6 of FIG. 1. The compass needle 21 of the first direction indication 20 is inclined through the remote point direction angle .phi..sub.D with respect to the vertical direction 22.) is fixed (Van Roekel; col. 3, ll. 53-58: It is also possible to select a fixed value for the forward distance. Such a fixed value enables a particularly simple implementation of the method. Such fixed values could be entered by the user, for example before the start of driving or when a vehicle is put into service.).
Regarding claim 9, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses a distance from the current location of the vehicle to the route point located ahead of the current location of the vehicle on the route (Van Roekel; col. 6, l. 55 to col. 7, l. 6: A remote point 17 is situated along the travel route 13 at a forward distance 16 from the instantaneous vehicle position 14. An arrow 18, representing the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, extends in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle 15. An arrow 19, indicating the direction of the remote point, extends from the instantaneous vehicle position 14 to the remote point 17. The arrow 18, representing the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, and the arrow 19, indicating the direction of the remote point, enclose a remote point direction angle .phi..sub.D relative to one another. For this instantaneous vehicle position 14 and its associated remote point 17 there is provided a first direction indication 20 in the form of a compass needle 21. This first direction indication 20 is reproduced on the optical output module 7 of the output device 6 of FIG. 1. The compass needle 21 of the first direction indication 20 is inclined through the remote point direction angle .phi..sub.D with respect to the vertical direction 22.) is variable (Van Roekel; col. 2, ll. 20-24: Variation of the forward distance enables adaptation of the forward distance to various parameters, for example vehicle parameters, parameters of the surroundings, and road parameters, thus optimizing the first direction indication for the user) depending on a road shape ahead of the vehicle (Van Roekel; col. 2, ll. 63-67: The forward distance is advantageously chosen to be comparatively small particularly for special curve geometries. This can be achieved by automatic adaptation of the forward distance in dependence on the course of the road.) and a traveling state of the vehicle (Van Roekel; col. 2, ll. 25-26: It is particularly attractive to increase the forward distance as the vehicle speed is higher.).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses the display state is at least one of a display position, an orientation, a color, a density, a shape (Lauro; col. 4, ll. 49-54: The process of selecting which display segments to activate in a particular situation can be broken into two parts: (1) selecting the correct segments to display compass information; and (2) selecting the correct segments to form a pointer that points in the direction of the desired destination.), or a lighting state of the display image.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohta in view of Van Roekel, Lauro and Siemens as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Fukumoto (US 2007/0067103).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses determining the dead zone angle to be larger when decreased navigation resolution is desired (Lauro; col. 2, ll. 35-39: the complexity of the compass card may be modified to provide the desired degree of resolution. For example, if only approximate compass readings are needed, then the compass card image may include only the four illustrated compass points [therefore the number of segments, L, is reduced which increases the angle between line segments and the dead zone angle that is rounded]) and dynamically adjusting the direction indication for multilane roads (Van Roekel; col. 2, ll. 41-51: The type of road is to be understood to mean the classification with which the individual roads are stored in the map memory of the navigation system. Types of classification are, for example motorways, federal highways, state highways, secondary roads and the like. The higher the expected average speed on the relevant type of road, preferably the longer the forward distance is chosen for this type of road. For example, a high average speed is to be expected on motorways and a motorway normally has few curves only. Therefore, a long forward distance is preferably chosen for motorways.).
Ohta, as modified, does not explicitly disclose the dead zone angle is determined to be larger when a total number of lanes on a road on which the vehicle is traveling is larger.
Fukumoto, in the same field of endeavor (vehicle navigation devices), discloses decreasing the resolution of displayed navigation information when a total number of lanes on a road on which a vehicle is traveling is larger (Fukumoto; para. 47: As the number of lanes increases, the viewing angle increases.; paras. 41-42: the car navigation apparatus changes the horizontal viewing angle (W) for the three-dimensional road map on the screen based on the reference line (0°). The reference line is drawn vertically on the screen and passes through the reference point. The rendering unit 12 of the control unit 7 performs a process to change the viewing angle … FIG. 3B shows how the displayable range changes when the horizontal viewing angle (W) on the screen is changed to (W+α). As mentioned above, changing the viewing angle (W) moves the boundary position (bp) horizontally defined in the displayable range on a line orthogonal to the reference line. When the horizontal viewing angle (W) on the screen is changed to (W+α), the displayable range changes to widen horizontally in accordance with the changed viewing angle [increasing the displayed area of a map on a display with fixed size results in decreasing the displayed resolution of the map]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to increase the dead zone angle rounded between line segments by decreasing the resolution (i.e., the number of line segments) of the circular segmented display of Ohta, as modified, when the number of lanes of the traveled road increases, as disclosed by Fukumoto, with the motivation of reducing information unnecessary for traveling on an express highway (Fukumoto; para. 45) thereby reducing driver distractions.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohta in view of Van Roekel, Lauro and Siemens as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ando (JP 2017-111575).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood, Ohta, as modified, discloses the dead zone angle is determined to be larger when decreased navigation sensitivity is desired (Lauro; col. 2, ll. 35-42: the complexity of the compass card may be modified to provide the desired degree of resolution. For example, if only approximate compass readings are needed, then the compass card image may include only the four illustrated compass points, or it may include only the compass point N, while including the line segments 22 and 24 to indicate the other three primary compass directions [therefore the number of segments, L, is decreased which increases the angle between line segments and the dead zone angle that is rounded]) and dynamically adjusting the direction indication for upcoming intersections (Van Roekel; col. 3, ll. 18-23: Another possibility consists in providing selectable forward distances for selectable intersection geometries. Upon detection of such selectable intersection geometries, the selectable forward distances for the first direction indication are then used for the passage through the relevant intersection.).
Ohta, as modified, does not explicitly disclose the dead zone angle is determined to be larger at a curve, a fork, or a junction.
Ando, in the same field of endeavor (vehicle navigation), discloses reducing navigation sensitivity when a vehicle is within a predetermined distance to an intersection (Ando; para. 57: if the vehicle 2 is located within the judgment maintenance area B that was set before entering the intersection 6, the determination in S12 becomes YES, and the result of the priority road determination that was made before the vehicle 2 entered the intersection 6 is maintained. Therefore, no notification is made in the driving assistance process of S11.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have increased the dead zone angle rounded between line segments by dynamically decreasing the number of line segments of the circular segmented display of Ohta, as modified, as the vehicle approaches an intersection, as disclosed by Ando, with the motivation of suppressing unnecessary driving assistance when navigation accuracy decreases at an intersection, thereby suppressing annoyance to the driver of the vehicle (Ando; paras. 56-57).
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 JOSEPH THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00AM-3:00PM ET.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached at (571)270-3713. 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.
/JOSEPH THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665