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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “wherein the external light source is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the external light source”. The specification consistently shows the external light sensor performing detection of the external light source. The claims will be read as “wherein the external light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the external light source”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites “wherein the light source is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the light source external to the vehicle”. The claims will be read as “wherein the light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the light source external to the vehicle”. Appropriate correction is required.
The above claim objection will be interpreted, as best understood, in light of the specification unless otherwise states.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7-8, 11, 15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over Choi et al. (US 2018/0304727).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a system for selectively darkening a windshield ([0005] discloses: might modulator onto a vehicle window to selectively darken an area) treated with a coating ([0040] discloses: light modulation layers, to reduce glare experienced by a driver), the system comprising: an external light sensor ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera) configured to detect a position of an external light source ([0050] discloses: 60, external light source) external to a vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source); an eye sensor ([0050] discloses: 28, camera) configured to detect a location of an eye of an operator of the vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28, camera, to monitor the face of the driver to identify the location of the driver’s eyes); an emitter ([0051] discloses: 70, ultraviolet light) housed within the vehicle (Figures 3 and 4 depict: 70, UV light, on same side of window as 4, eyes, therefore considered housed within the vehicle) and configured to excite a location of a coating on a windshield from a first state to a second state ([0051] discloses: photochromic material, changes from transparent to opaque), wherein the second state is more opaque than the first state (Examiner notes that opaques is considered more opaque than transparent) and reduces a passage of light from the external light source to the eye of the operator ([0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources); and a processor ([0041] discloses: processers and microprocessors in processing circuitry) programmed to determine a first location of the coating for exciting based on the detected position of the external light source and detected location of the eye (Figure 5 depicts and describes: steps of anti-glare reduction device in real time), and to control the emitter to selectively excite the coating at the first location from the first state to the second state ([0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Regarding claim 4, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the coating is an ultraviolet active coating ([0062] discloses: portions of photochromic layer that can be illuminated with ultraviolet light; [0051] discloses: material that changes from transparent to opaque, when exposed to light, light may be ultraviolet).
Regarding claim 5, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the emitter is a phaser and emits photons to excite the coating ([0051] discloses: 70, ultraviolet light; Examiner notes that ultraviolet light is photons; [0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Regarding claim 7, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the processor is responsive to a change of position of the external light source relative to the windshield ([0055] discloses: determining location of external light sources such as 60, source, are located relative to 14, windows, and the drivers eyes), and wherein the processor controls the emitter to excite a second location of the coating based on the change in position of the external light source ([0057] discloses: glare reduction activities may be performed continuously during operation of vehicle; Continuous glare reduction based on eye location necessarily includes updating, to include at least second location, the darkening region when the detected external light source location changes; [0056] discloses: based on light source location, control circuitry controls transparency).
Regarding claim 8, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the processor is responsive to a change of location of the eye of the operator relative to the windshield ([0056] discloses: modification of light blocking structures base on driver eye location), and wherein the processor controls the emitter to excite a second location of the coating based on the change in location of the eye of the operator ([0057] discloses: glare reduction activities may be performed continuously during operation of vehicle; Continuous glare reduction based on eye location necessarily includes updating, to include at least second region, the darkening region when the detected eye location changes; [0056] discloses: based driver eye location, control circuitry controls transparency).
Regarding claim 11, Choi discloses a method, comprising: detecting a position of a light source ([0050] discloses: 60, external light source) external to a vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source); detecting a location of an eye of an operator of the vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28, camera, to monitor the face of the driver to identify the location of the driver’s eyes); determining a portion of a windshield treated with a coating ([0040] discloses: light modulation layers, to reduce glare experienced by a driver) to darken ([0005] discloses: might modulator onto a vehicle window to selectively darken an area; [0051] discloses: photochromic material, changes from transparent to opaque) in response to the position of the light source and the location of the eye (Figure 5 depicts and describes: steps of anti-glare reduction device in real time), wherein the portion intersects a path between the location of the eye and the position of the light source ([0040] discloses: light modulation layers, to reduce glare; Examiner notes that this is the glare from the external light source on the eyes of the driver through the windshield at the specified position of the glare determined by external light source and eye locations); and controlling an emitter ([0051] discloses: 70, ultraviolet light; [0041] discloses: processers and microprocessors in processing circuitry; Examiner notes that the circuitry is used to control the ultraviolet light to enable the light modulation layers to darken/lighten) housed within the vehicle (Figures 3 and 4 depict: 70, UV light, on same side of window as 4, eyes, therefore considered housed within the vehicle) to selectively darken the portion of the windshield by exciting the coating at the portion of the windshield ([0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Regarding claim 15, Choi discloses a system for reducing glare within a vehicle ([0040] discloses: light modulation layers, to reduce glare experienced by a driver), the system comprising: a windshield treated with an ultraviolet-active coating ([0051] discloses: photochromic material that changes from transparent to opaque when exposed to light, light may be ultraviolet light; therefore considered an ultraviolet-active coating); an external light sensor ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera) configured to detect a location of a light source external ([0050] discloses: 60, external light source) to a vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source; [0034] discloses: sunlight or other light sources; Examiner notes that sunlight is external to a vehicle); an image sensor ([0042] discloses: digital image sensors) configured to generate images of an operator of the vehicle ([0058] sensors, to determine the location, the drivers eyes and the direction of view of the driver; therefore considered to generate images of an operator of the motor vehicle); an emitter ([0051] discloses: 70, ultraviolet light) movably housed within the vehicle ([0019] discloses: a steerable light source) and configured to excite a location of the coating from a first state to a second state ([0051] discloses: photochromic material, changes from transparent to opaque), wherein the second state is more opaque than the first state (Examiner notes that opaques is considered more opaque than transparent); and a processor ([0041] discloses: processers and microprocessors in processing circuitry) programmed to: process the images generated by the image sensor (Figure 5 depicts and describes: steps of anti-glare reduction device in real time; [0058] sensors, to determine the location, the drivers eyes and the direction of view of the driver; Examiner notes that the processor is considered to process the images generated by the image sensor) to determine a location of eyes of the operator of the vehicle ([0050] discloses: 28, camera, to monitor the face of the driver to identify the location of the driver’s eyes), determine a first location of the coating for exciting based on the determined location of the eyes of the operator and the detected location of a light source external to a vehicle ([0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources), and control the emitter to excite the first location of the coating from the first state to the second state ([0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Regarding claim 18, Choi discloses the system of claim 15 wherein the processor is responsive to a change of position of the light source relative to the windshield ([0055] discloses: determining location of external light sources such as 60, source, are located relative to 14, windows, and the drivers eyes), and wherein the processor controls the emitter to excite a second location of the coating based on the change in position of the light source ([0057] discloses: glare reduction activities may be performed continuously during operation of vehicle; Continuous glare reduction based on eye location necessarily includes updating, to include at least second location, the darkening region when the detected external light source location changes; [0056] discloses: based on light source location, control circuitry controls transparency).
Regarding claim 19, Choi discloses the system of claim 15 wherein the processor is responsive to a change of location of the eye of the operator relative to the windshield ([0056] discloses: modification of light blocking structures base on driver eye location), and wherein the processor controls the emitter to excite a second location of the coating based on the change in location of the eye of the operator ([0057] discloses: glare reduction activities may be performed continuously during operation of vehicle; Continuous glare reduction based on eye location necessarily includes updating, to include at least second region, the darkening region when the detected eye location changes; [0056] discloses: based driver eye location, control circuitry controls transparency).
Regarding claim 20, Choi discloses the system of claim 15 wherein the emitter is configured to contemporaneously excite both the first location and a second location of the coating ([0059] and Figure 7 depict: excitation of 96-1 and 96-2, portions, a first and second location both excited contemporaneously).
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.
Claims 2-3, 6, 12-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0304727), as applied to claims: 1, 11 and 15 above, in view of Araki et al. (US 2014/0246982).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 further comprising the windshield treated with the coating ([0040] discloses: light modulation layers) and an internal light sensor ([0042] discloses: 26, ambient light sensor) configured to sense an internal luminance within the vehicle ([0042] discloses: 26, ambient light sensor, that measures the amount of light on the interior of the vehicle).
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the external light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the external light source and wherein the processor is programmed to activate the emitter to excite the first location of the coating in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a system (Figure 2) wherein the external light sensor ([0041] teaches: 6A, sensor; analogous to cameras 28 and 28’ of Choi) is configured to detect a magnitude ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; therefore considered to detect a magnitude) of an external luminance (Figure 5 depicts: 11, external light, for embodiments 1-3, considered to be the external luminance detected by 6A, sensor) of the external light source and wherein the processor is programmed ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance) to activate the emitter ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED; [0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison) to excite the first location of the coating (in at least abstract discloses: display region; Araki teaches activating a light emitting element in response to luminance comparison, it would have been obvious to apply this comparison based activation logic to Choi’s emitter controlling a photochromic coating) in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison; Examiner notes that the comparative luminance sensor is analogous to comparing the luminance of inside and outside of a motor vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a system wherein the external light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the external light source and wherein the processor is programmed to activate the emitter to excite the first location of the coating in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby improving the responsiveness and efficiency of the glare reduction system.
Regarding claim 3, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the external light sensor or the eye sensor are configured to sense an internal luminance within the vehicle ([0058] discloses: 28, camera, may have two or more individual sensors e.g., 28’ camera of Figs. 3 and 4; therefore 28, camera functions as both the external light sensor and the internal light sensor, in parts; [0042] discloses: light sensors that measure amount of light on exterior and/or interior of vehicle).
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the processor activates the emitter to excite first location of the coating when an external luminance sensed by the external light sensor is greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a system wherein the processor activates the emitter ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance) to excite first location of the coating (in at least abstract discloses: display region; Araki teaches activating a light emitting element in response to luminance comparison, it would have been obvious to apply this comparison based activation logic to Choi’s emitter controlling a photochromic coating) when an external luminance sensed by the external light sensor is greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a system wherein the processor activates the emitter to excite first location of the coating when an external luminance sensed by the external light sensor is greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby control efficiency and glare mitigation performance.
Regarding claim 6, Choi discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the processor controls an intensity generated by the emitter ([0057] discloses: determining which portions of light modulation layers should be adjusted; [0057] applying 70, light, to photochromic layer) as determined by the external light sensor ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source; [0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby control efficiency and glare mitigation performance.
Regarding claim 12, Choi discloses the method of claim 11 further comprising: detecting an internal ambient luminance within the vehicle ([0042] discloses: 26, ambient light sensor, that measures the amount of light on the interior of the vehicle); detecting an external luminance from the light source ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source; therefore considered detecting an external luminance from the light source).
Choi fails to disclose a method of activating the emitter when the external luminance is greater than a threshold relative to the internal ambient luminance. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a method of activating the emitter ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED) when the external luminance is greater than a threshold relative to the internal ambient luminance ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance) to activate the emitter ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED; [0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a method of activating the emitter when the external luminance is greater than a threshold relative to the internal ambient luminance. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby improving the responsiveness and efficiency of the glare reduction system.
Regarding claim 13, Choi discloses the method of claim 11.
Choi fails to disclose a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when an external luminance is less than a threshold relative to an internal ambient luminance. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when an external luminance is less than a threshold relative to an internal ambient luminance ([0071] teaches: increase and decrease of 4A, LED, considered the emitter, due to larger and smaller luminance comparison conditions).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when an external luminance is less than a threshold relative to an internal ambient luminance. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby improving the responsiveness and efficiency of the glare reduction system.
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Choi discloses the system of claim 15 further comprising an internal light sensor configured to sense an internal luminance within the vehicle ([0042] discloses: 26, ambient light sensor, that measures the amount of light on the interior of the vehicle).
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the light source external to the vehicle, and wherein the processor is programmed to activate the emitter to excite the first location of the coating in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a system (Figure 2) wherein the light sensor ([0041] teaches: 6A, sensor; analogous to cameras 28 and 28’ of Choi) is configured to detect a magnitude ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; therefore considered to detect a magnitude) of an external luminance of the light source external to the vehicle (Figure 5 depicts: 11, external light, for embodiments 1-3, considered to be the external luminance detected by 6A, sensor), and wherein the processor is programmed ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance) to activate the emitter ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED; [0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison) to excite the first location of the coating (in at least abstract discloses: display region; Araki teaches activating a light emitting element in response to luminance comparison, it would have been obvious to apply this comparison based activation logic to Choi’s emitter controlling a photochromic coating) in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance ([0071] teaches: 4A, LED is increased by a predetermined amount based on analysis of luminance comparison; Examiner notes that the comparative luminance sensor is analogous to comparing the luminance of inside and outside of a motor vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a system wherein the light sensor is configured to detect a magnitude of an external luminance of the light source external to the vehicle, and wherein the processor is programmed to activate the emitter to excite the first location of the coating in response to the magnitude of the external luminance being greater than a threshold relative to the internal luminance. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby improving the responsiveness and efficiency of the glare reduction system.
Regarding claim 17, Choi discloses the system of claim 15 wherein the processor controls an intensity generated by the emitter ([0057] discloses: determining which portions of light modulation layers should be adjusted; [0057] applying 70, light, to photochromic layer) as determined by the external light sensor ([0050] discloses: 28’, camera, obtains information on location of external sources of glare such as 60, external light source; [0052] discloses: photochromic material darkened when exposed to light from one or more light sources; along with Figure 5 describes selectively exciting the light modulation layers from light to dark when exposed to external light source).
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source. Choi and Araki are related because both disclose comparing luminance values to adjust light output based on relative brightness conditions.
Araki teaches a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source ([0068] teaches: comparative luminance sensor to analyze and determine larger/smaller luminance; [0014] teaches: process for decreasing luminance).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Araki and provide a system wherein the processer controls the intensity generated by the emitter based on a magnitude of the external light source. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby control efficiency and glare mitigation performance.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0304727) in view of Dewell (US 2012/0019891).
Regarding claim 9, Choi discloses the system of claim 1.
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the processor is programmed to determine a second location of the coating for exciting based on the detected position of the external light source and detected position of the eye, wherein the emitter is configured to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating, wherein the processor is programmed to control the emitter to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating. Choi and Dewell are related because both disclose window selective light modulation systems.
Dewell teaches a system wherein the processor is programmed to determine a second location of the coating for exciting based on the detected position of the external light source and detected position of the eye ([0012] teaches: vehicle eye sensor to determine position of operator in vehicle), wherein the emitter is configured to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating (Claim 8 teaches: system processor to determine and control which elements of the electochromergic window to activate and deactivate so as to automatically control or eliminate glare on the eyes of the occupants), wherein the processor is programmed to control the emitter to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating ([0021] teaches: separately activatable photochromic elements or pixels).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Dewell and provide a system wherein the processor is programmed to determine a second location of the coating for exciting based on the detected position of the external light source and detected position of the eye, wherein the emitter is configured to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating, wherein the processor is programmed to control the emitter to contemporaneously excite both the first location of the coating and a second location of the coating. Doing so would allow for selective activation of the emitter based on relative luminance conditions, thereby control efficiency and glare mitigation performance for multiple occupants simultaneously.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0304727), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Panopoulous et al. (US 9,629,220).
Regarding claim 10, Choi discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the emitter is mounted to the vehicle, and wherein the processor is programmed move the emitter based upon the detected position of the external light source and detected location of the eye.
Choi fails to disclose a system wherein the emitter is mounted in a rotatable manner allowing rotation of the emitter and wherein the processor is programmed to rotate the emitter based upon the sensor data. Choi and Panopoulous are related because both disclose programable emitter processes for optical systems.
Panopoulous teaches a system wherein the emitter is mounted in a rotatable manner allowing rotation of the emitter and wherein the processor is programmed to rotate the emitter based upon the sensor data (Col. 3, lines 25-45 teach: rotating light panels based on control systems).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Panopoulous and provide a system wherein the emitter is mounted in a rotatable manner allowing rotation of the emitter and wherein the processor is programmed to rotate the emitter based upon the sensor data. Doing so would allow for improved directional control and optimized light delivery toward a target region, thereby improving the overall controllability and functionality of the optical system.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0304727), as applied to claim 11 above, in view of Dawklins, Jr. (US 5,446,506).
Regarding claim 14, Choi discloses the method of claim 11.
Choi fails to disclose a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when the location of the eye of the operator is directed away from the windshield for a period of time. Choi and Dawklins are related because both disclose eye movement trackers and sensors.
Dawklins teaches a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when the location of the eye of the operator is directed away from the windshield for a period of time (Col. 5, lines 15-24 teach: wearer may activate the display by looking at it and deactivate the display by looking away from it; Examiner notes that this is analogous to eye sensors, tracking eyes directed at a windshield).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Choi to incorporate the teachings of Dawklins and provide a method further comprising: deactivating the emitter when the location of the eye of the operator is directed away from the windshield for a period of time. Doing so would allow for power conservation and preventing unnecessary operation when not in active use, thereby improving the overall functionality and durability of the optical system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Davis et al. (US 2024/0208532), Hassani et al. (US 2023/0177900), Sobhany (US 2021/0261050) and Worthen (US 10,053,059) all disclose relevant optical systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Sipes whose telephone number is (703)756-1372. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6:00 - 11:00 and 1:00 - 6:00.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/J.C.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872