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 Amendment
This action is in response to the amendment filed on December 22nd, 2025. Claims 1 and 5 have been amended and claims 2, 4, and 6 have been cancelled. The amended claims have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain rejected in the application.
Response to Arguments
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding Lacoste failing to teach first and second mode, the arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Lacoste explicitly teaches this [Lacoste: 0039 “a symbol image generation system to generate symbology image data for contact-analogue display by said HUD”][Lacoste: 0125 “It will be appreciated that a range of strategies may be employed, from reverting to flat (not contact analogue) symbology when occlusion is detected”](teaches a normal contact analogue display and a different display behavior when occlusion is detected, corresponding to first and second mode). Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain rejected in the application.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding Lacoste failing to teach switching based on whether the user is able to see the target object, the argument has been fully considered but is not persuasive. Lacoste explicitly teaches this limitation [Lacoste: 0126 “camera 462 provides an input to an occlusion detection processor 468 which identifies occlusions and provides an occlusion data”][Lacoste: 0040 “The presence of an occlusion in front of the vehicle may be detected by processing an image captured by at least one light-based camera”](teaches detecting whether an object (occlusion) is occluded from the users view and changing the display based on that visibility condition). Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain rejected in the application.
In response to applicant’s argument regarding Lacoste failing to teach a second mode having a hollow and transparent central portion. The office action never portrayed Lacoste teaching hollow and transparent central portion. Pryor was referenced for explicitly teaching those limitations [Pryor: 0352 “The knob as shown is hollow, which allows data projected to the screen by projector 1532 to be viewed through the middle of the knob.”] [Pryor: 0354 “The datum’s can lie on the back of the knob on the driver side of the screen as shown above , which allows the knob to be transparent in its center, allowing the projected data on the screen behind to be viewed through the knob. Or as shown in this figure in dotted lines the screen can alternatively be cut out to form hole 1540 in the center with the actual diffusing portion of the knob 1542 (also in dotted lines) located within the bore of the knob itself”](teaches an image element with a transparent center and a hole in the center (hollow)). Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain rejected in the application.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding dependent claim 3 being allowable. Argument has been fully considered but is not persuasive. Due to the examiner maintaining the rejection for independent claim 1, the rejection for claim 3 is maintained. Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain rejected in the application.
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 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et. al (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0224062), in view of Pryor (EP 2 581 248).
Regarding claim 1, Lacoste discloses a display control system adapted for a vehicle [Lacoste: 0039 “In a related aspect the invention provides a road vehicle contact-analogue head up display (HUD), the head up display comprising”], comprising: a display control device, controlling a display device to display a location information image representing location information of a target recognition object in a first mode on a screen member, wherein the screen member is provided between the target recognition object and a user of the vehicle, and the display control device comprises (interpreted as a controller drives a display to show an image that conveys where a recognized target is. It shows that image in a first display mode on a physical screen that lies between the user and the real world object)[Lacoste: 0035 “The skilled person will appreciate that a contact analogue HUD as described above will generally employ a combiner, which may comprise a coating on the windshield (windscreen). The use of a laser facilitates use of a chromatically selective coating to combine the HUD display with the view through the windshield.”][Lacoste: 0050 “presentation to an optical combiner to combine light exiting said image generation system bearing said Virtual image with light from an external scene, for presentation of a combined image to a user”][Lacoste: 0025 “Thus in embodiments the symbology image data includes data for a graphical representation of a real-life object, such as a road sign”](teaches the windshield/combiner which is the screen member between the user and outside objects and the controller drives symbology onto that combiner like displaying a location image on the screen member. Image data may include a road sign which could represent location information): a vehicle location identification unit, identifying a current location of the vehicle (Lacoste: 440; Fig. 8 “OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL CONTEXTUAL SCENE DATA (eg ROAD MAP DATA)”)[Lacoste: 0029 “in-car GPS (global positioning system)”], wherein the display control device controls the display device to display the location information image on the screen member based on the current location of the vehicle, map information of a road on which the vehicle is traveling, a captured image of an outside of the vehicle, and the location information of the target recognition object (Lacoste: 440 & 425; Fig. 4a “OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL CONTEXTUAL SCENE DATA (eg ROAD MAPDATA)” “CAR/DRIVER VIEWPOINT DATA (CAR POSITION, ATTITUDE)”) [Lacoste: 0029 “topographic data of a similar type to that employed with ”][Lacoste: 0040 “The presence of an occlusion in front of the vehicle may be detected by processing an image captured by at least one light-based camera or by processing a radar image in-car GPS (global positioning system) navigational aids, a marker at an apparent distance Substantially equal to a stop ping distance of the vehicle, road signs, a pedestrian marker (to highlight a pedestrian in front of the vehicle), hazard warnings and the like.”](teaches ingesting map data, vehicle pose, and camera imagery of the outside scene. It generates symbology such as pedestrian markets at real world positions like location information of a recognized target and renders them to the HUD using those inputs), when the user is able to see the target recognition object, the display control device controls the display device to display the location information image representing the location information of the target recognition object in the first mode on the screen member (interpreted as if the object is visible, use the first mode)[Lacoste: 0031 “when an occlusion is detected the system may revert to a simpler mode in which the contact analogue mapping of symbology to the road is dispensed with to provide a “flat” two-dimensional view.”] (teaches that by implication, when no occlusion is detected (meaning nothing obstructing the view), that means object is visible to the user, then the normal contact analogue keeps rendering on the display), and when the user is not able to see the target recognition object, the display control device controls the display device to display the location information image representing the location information of the target recognition object in a second mode on the screen member (interpreted as, if the objects not visible, use a different mode)[Lacoste: 0041 “Where the occlusion detection processor detects an occlusion of part of the driver's view in which symbology or graphical images would otherwise be presented the system has a choice of strategies. One strategy is to revert to a “flat' 2D display from which contact analogue cues are Substantially absent. Another strategy is to clip the symbology/ graphical elements using the shape of the detected occlusion so that the HUD image is not displayed over the occlusion. A third strategy is to combine the displayed symbology/graphical elements with the detected occlusion so that, for example, the symbology/graphical elements “behind the occlusion are displayed in a modified form, for example, dimmer or in a different colour or using a dashed line”](teaches that when there is an occlusion (user cant see the target), then Lacoste switches to a different display mode which corresponds to second mode), and wherein the display control device controls the display device to display the location information image on the screen member or project the location information image on the screen member, so that the location information image is located on a virtual line between the user and the target recognition object [Lacoste: 0029 “for example a combination of one or more of topographic data of a similar type to that employed with in-car GPS (global positioning system) navigational aids, a marker at an apparent distance Substantially equal to a stop ping distance of the vehicle, road signs, a pedestrian marker (to highlight a pedestrian in front of the vehicle), hazard warnings and the like”](teaches projecting/displaying a marker for a real world object, including a pedestrian market and mapping that into the real world scene and GPS (location information)), but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the location information image in the second mode has a central portion which is hollow and transparent.
However, Pryor discloses wherein the location information image in the second mode has a central portion which is hollow and transparent [Pryor: 0352 “The knob as shown is hollow, which allows data projected to the screen by projector 1532 to be viewed through the middle of the knob.”] [Pryor: 0354 “The datum’s can lie on the back of the knob on the driver side of the screen as shown above , which allows the knob to be transparent in its center, allowing the projected data on the screen behind to be viewed through the knob. Or as shown in this figure in dotted lines the screen can alternatively be cut out to form hole 1540 in the center with the actual diffusing portion of the knob 1542 (also in dotted lines) located within the bore of the knob itself”](teaches an image element with a transparent center and a hole in the center (hollow)).
Lacoste and Pryor are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of in vehicle visual display systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Lacoste to incorporate Pryor’s teachings of using a hollow and transparent center. The motivation for such a combination would provide the benefit of preserving visibility into the real world.
Regarding claim 3, Lacoste and Pryor disclose the display control system according to claim 1, wherein the screen member is a glass of the vehicle [Lacoste: 0035 “analogue HUD as described above will generally employ a combiner, which may comprise a coating on the windshield (windscreen). The use of a laser facilitates use of a chromatically selective coating to combine the HUD display with the view through the windshield.”](windshield glass corresponds to the screen member), and the display control device controls the display device to project the location information image on the screen member, so that the user is able to see the location information image superimposed on the target recognition object (interpreted as the image is projected onto that glass so it is overlaid on the real object)[Lacoste: 0050 “presentation to an optical combiner to combine light exiting said image generation system bearing said Virtual image with light from an external scene, for presentation of a combined image to a user”][Lacoste: 0029 “a pedestrian marker (to highlight a pedestrian in front of the vehicle), hazard warnings and the like”][Lacoste: 0153 “naively a colour holographic projection system could be constructed by Superimposed”](teaches presenting an image to a user that can be superimposed so that it appears over the real scene and that image can have location information).
Claim 5 is a method claim corresponding to claim 1 without any additional limitations. Thus, claim 5 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 above.
Conclusion
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 AHMED TAHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6805. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5 pm, Mon - Fri. 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, XIAO WU can be reached at (571)272-7761. 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.
/AHMED TAHA/Examiner, Art Unit 2613
/XIAO M WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2613