DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Y The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This office action is made in response to Applicant’s remarks filed on 3/17/26. Claims 1-12 have been cancelled. Claims 13-16 and 20-23 have been amended. Claims 13-27 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments regarding Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 112 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been considered, however, Applicant's amended claims are newly rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as discussed in the corresponding section below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 103 have been considered but are not persuasive. Therefore, these rejections are maintained.
Regarding claims 13 and 22, Applicant asserts that the cited prior art does not teach the limitations of the claim, however, Applicant does not particularly identify what specific claim elements and/or limitations are not disclosed by the prior art, nor does Applicant provide support or rationale for their general assertion. Applicant’s argument is accordingly moot. Examiner, however, has addressed the limitations of the claim as discussed in the rejections below.
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 13-27 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites: "A method for operating a reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield, wherein a display unit is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display unit, the display unit being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant, the method comprising:
outputting a sequence of measurement display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region;
obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, for each of the measurement display images, a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image of the sequence of measurement display images is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals;
evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile for the sequence of measurement display images, wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness; and
depending on a result of the evaluating, signaling a presence of a foreign object on the display surface."
This language is vague and indefinite for at least the following reasons:
Intended Use: The claim contains the following language that is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the scope of this language is intended to affirmatively require specific performance or whether this language is deliberately articulated as an expression of intended use:
“… for each of the measurement display images … ”
“… for the sequence of measurement display images …”
Accordingly, this language does not serve to patentably distinguish the claimed structure over that of the reference. See In re Pearson, 181 USPQ 641; In re Yanush, 177 USPQ 705; In re Finsterwalder, 168 USPQ 530; In re Casey, 512 USPQ 235; In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458; Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2nd 1647.
Although the following language does not necessarily cure the issues discussed above, for purposes of examination under 35 USC 102 and 103, Examiner will interpret this language as reading:
"A method for operating a reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield, wherein a display unit is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display unit, the display unit being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant, the method comprising:
outputting a sequence of measurement display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region;
obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image of the sequence of measurement display images is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals;
evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness; and
depending on a result of the evaluating, signaling a presence of a foreign object on the display surface."
Claims 14-21 are further rejected as depending on this claim.
Claim 22 recites: "A reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield, the reflection display system comprising:
a display, which is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display unit, the display being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant;
an ambient brightness sensor, which is configured to detect an ambient brightness and to provide a corresponding brightness signal; and
a control processor, which is configured to:
output a sequence of measurement display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region;
obtain a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, for each of the measurement display images, a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image of the sequence of measurement display images is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals;
evaluate the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile for the sequence of measurement display images, wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness; and
depending on a result of an evaluation, signal a presence of a foreign object on the display surface."
This language is also rejected as vague and indefinite for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 13 above.
Although the following language does not necessarily cure the issues discussed above, for purposes of examination under 35 USC 102 and 103, Examiner will interpret this language as reading:
"A reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield, the reflection display system comprising:
a display, which is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display unit, the display being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant;
an ambient brightness sensor, which is configured to detect an ambient brightness and to provide a corresponding brightness signal; and
a control processor, which is configured to:
output a sequence of measurement display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region;
obtain a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image of the sequence of measurement display images is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals;
evaluate the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness; and
depending on a result of an evaluation, signal a presence of a foreign object on the display surface."
Claims 23-27 are further rejected as depending on this claim.
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 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.
Claims 13-17 and 21-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincen (US 2014/0034806 A1) in view of Hashimoto (US 2015/0042541 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Vincen discloses a method for operating a reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield, wherein a display unit is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display unit, the display unit being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 4, and related text), the method comprising:
outputting display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region (see e.g. at least ¶ 11, 15, Fig. 1, and related text, generating images on a heads-up display (HUD)/windshield including a plurality of pixels having varying levels of intensity across the image);
obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals (e.g. at least light detector 32, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 14-15, Fig. 3-4, and related text, detecting emitted light 24, 34);
evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the display image], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness (see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 3-4, 16-17, 27, Fig. 2, 4, and related text, determining that a foreign body is present in on or near the display when the light intensity received by the light detector decreases due to the presence of the foreign body blocking light emitted by the light sources); and
depending on a result of the evaluating, signaling a presence of a foreign object on the display surface (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 29, turning off a light beam when the light path is obstructed).
Additionally, Hashimoto teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Vincen including namely: [outputting] a sequence of measurement [display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region] (see e.g. at least Abstract ¶ 11-13, 28, Fig. 2, and related text, displaying a sequence of images of varying brightness including navigation information, fuel consumption information of the vehicle, and other vehicle operation measurements);
[obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image] of the sequence of measurement display images [is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals] (see e.g. at least ¶ 13, 46, 48, 60, detecting a change in brightness using an illumination sensor);
[evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unchanged and there is constant ambient brightness] (id.);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Vincen by [outputting] a sequence of measurement [display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region]; [obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image] of the sequence of measurement display images [is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals]; [evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unchanged and there is constant ambient brightness] as taught by Hashimoto in order to improve readability of a head-up display device by changing the display output based upon a detection of a change in brightness (Hashimoto: ¶ 6-13).
Regarding claim 14, Modified Vincen teaches that each of the measurement display images has a pattern which has a first region of a first luminous intensity and a remaining region of a second luminous intensity, and the first luminous intensity is higher than the second luminous intensity (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 15).
Regarding claim 15, Modified Vincen teaches that the first regions of all the measurement display images cover an entire display region (Hashimoto: see e.g. at least ¶ 42, optionally displaying constant color display).
Regarding claim 16, Modified Vincen teaches that at least one pattern of the measurement display images comprises:
one or more strip-like regions of the first luminous intensity and remaining regions of the second luminous intensity (Hashimoto: see e.g. at least Fig. 2, and related text);
checkerboard regions of the first luminous intensity and remaining regions of the second luminous intensity (Hashimoto: id., wherein digital displays are inherently pixelated); or
regions of different luminous intensities and remaining regions of the second luminous intensity, wherein the different luminous intensities are higher than the second luminous intensity (Hashimoto: id.).
Regarding claim 17, Modified Vincen teaches that the method is performed upon determining that an enabling condition is satisfied, wherein the enabling condition comprises at least one of:
an ambient brightness lies not above a first predefined threshold value (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 17, 23-24, 27, Fig. 3-4, and related text), or
a gradient of a variation of the ambient brightness lies below a second predetermined threshold value (Vincen: id.).
Regarding claim 21, Modified Vincen teaches that the evaluating comprises:
obtaining a predefined change in the reference brightness signals of the reference brightness profile corresponding to two of the measurement display images (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 17, 23-24, Fig. 3-4, and related text); and
comparing the predefined change with a corresponding change in the brightness signals of the measured brightness profile (id.).
Regarding claim 22, Vincen discloses a reflection display system for displaying a display image for a vehicle occupant of a motor vehicle by reflection of the display image on a front windshield (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 1-3, and related text), the reflection display system comprising:
a display, which is configured to output the display image via a display surface of the display, the display being arranged on an upper side of a dashboard such that a reflection of the display image via the front windshield is perceptible in an eye region of a vehicle occupant (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 1-3, and related text, generating images on a heads-up display (HUD)/windshield in view of a driver);
an ambient brightness sensor, which is configured to detect an ambient brightness and to provide a corresponding brightness signal (e.g. at least light detector 32, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 14-15, Fig. 3-4, and related text, detecting emitted light 24, 34, and sending detection signal 36 to controller 38); and
a control processor (e.g. at least controller 38, see e.g. at least Fig. 3, and related text), which is configured to:
obtain a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals (e.g. at least light detector 32, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 14-15, Fig. 3-4, and related text, detecting emitted light 24, 34);
evaluate the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the display image], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unmasked and there is constant ambient brightness (see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 3-4, 16-17, 27, Fig. 2, 4, and related text, determining that a foreign body is present in on or near the display when the light intensity received by the light detector decreases due to the presence of the foreign body blocking light emitted by the light sources); and
depending on a result of an evaluation, signal a presence of a foreign object on the display surface (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 29, turning off a light beam when the light path is obstructed).
Additionally, Hashimoto teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Vincen including namely: [output] a sequence of measurement [display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region] (see e.g. at least Abstract ¶ 11-13, 28, Fig. 2, and related text, displaying a sequence of images of varying brightness including navigation information, fuel consumption information of the vehicle, and other vehicle operation measurements);
[obtain a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image] of the sequence of measurement display images [is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals] (see e.g. at least ¶ 13, 46, 48, 60, detecting a change in brightness using an illumination sensor);
[evaluate the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unchanged and there is constant ambient brightness] (id.);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Vincen by [outputting] a sequence of measurement [display images with different patterns with different luminous intensities from region to region]; [obtaining a measured brightness profile by detecting, by an ambient brightness sensor, [intended for each of the measurement display images], a respective brightness signal while a respective measurement display image] of the sequence of measurement display images [is being displayed, wherein the measured brightness profile includes the respective brightness signals]; [evaluating the measured brightness profile with respect to a predefined reference brightness profile [intended for the sequence of measurement display images], wherein the reference brightness profile includes reference brightness signals corresponding to times during which the display surface is unchanged and there is constant ambient brightness] as taught by Hashimoto in order to improve readability of a head-up display device by changing the display output based upon a detection of a change in brightness (Hashimoto: ¶ 6-13).
Regarding claim 23, Modified Vincen teaches that the ambient brightness sensor is arranged such that an output of a region of a first luminous intensity by the display unit influences a measurement of a brightness signal, and the first luminous intensity is higher than a second luminous intensity of a remaining region (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 14-16, Fig. 3-4, and related text).
Regarding claim 24, Modified Vincen teaches that the display unit is arranged in a depression such that the display image that is displayed on the display surface of the display unit is not directly perceptible in the eye region (Vincen: see e.g. at least Fig. 1-2, and related text).
Regarding claim 25, Modified Vincen teaches that the ambient brightness sensor is arranged in the depression (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 12-13, Fig. 1-3, and related text).
Regarding claim 26, Modified Vincen teaches that the ambient brightness sensor is arranged to a side of the display unit (Vincen: see e.g. at least ¶ 12-13, Fig. 1-3, and related text).
Regarding claim 27, Vincen discloses a motor vehicle (Vincen: e.g. at least vehicle 14, see e.g. at least Fig. 1-3, and related text) comprising:
the dashboard between the front windshield of the motor vehicle and a steering column (Vincen: see e.g. at least Fig. 1-2, and related text); and
the reflection display system according to claim 22 (see rejection of claim 22, above).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincen (US 2014/0034806 A1) in view of Hashimoto (US 2015/0042541 A1) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kawashima (JP 2019002959 A. For purposes of this examination, Examiner will refer to the English language translation of this reference provided with this Office Action).
Regarding claim 18, Kawashima teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Vincen, including namely: that a sequence of measurement display images is run through within a time period of less than 1s (see e.g. at least ¶ 49, Fig. 9, and related text).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Vincen by configuring that the sequence of measurement display images is run through within a time period of less than 1s as taught by Kawashima in order to provide an improved head-up display device capable of properly setting display luminance of an image in a responsive and cost effective manner (Kawashima: Abstract, ¶ 49).
Regarding claim 19, Modified Vincen teaches that the time period is less than 100 ms (Kawashima: see e.g. at least ¶ 49, Fig. 9, and related text).
Regarding claim 20, Kawashima teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Vincen, including namely: that the sequence of measurement display images is provided within a predefined video sequence, the brightness profile being recorded at corresponding output times of the measurement display images when outputting the video sequence (see e.g. at least ¶ 9, 14, 49, Fig. 9, and related text).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Vincen by configuring that the sequence of measurement display images is provided within a predefined video sequence, the brightness profile being recorded at corresponding output times of the measurement display images when outputting the video sequence as taught by Kawashima in order to provide an improved head-up display device capable of properly setting display luminance of an image in a responsive and cost effective manner (Kawashima: Abstract, ¶ 49).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 CHARLES J HAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3980. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th and every other F (7:30 AM - 5 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christian Chace can be reached on 571-272-4190. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 900-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLES J HAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights