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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-5, 6-11, and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rao, et al., EP 3885206A1.
Regarding claim 1, Rao discloses a method (para 0005; a method for guidance of face login setting, a vehicle-mounted system, and a vehicle), comprising:
obtaining image information (para 0012; determining whether the whole face of the current user is detected by the camera device);
adjusting, by a processor (para 0026; a system includes a processing units), a face in the image information based on a face attitude angle in the image information to generate a face image (para 0017-0018; information collection guidance guides the current user to turn a left face and to turn a right face to the lens of the camera device according to instructions of the information collection guidance; collecting left face feature information and right face feature information of the current user when the left face and the right face of the current user is detected by means of the camera device);
displaying prompt information on a head-up display based on the image information, wherein the prompt information to guides a user to perform a recording of facial information (para 0012 and 0037; performing, when the whole face of the current user is detected, the step of determining, according to a face feature of the current user detected by the camera device, whether a face of the current user has been associated with another account different from the current login account; outputting, when the whole face of the current user is not detected, a face detection invalidation prompt page and a face detection guidance voice, to guide the current user to adjust the sitting posture and execute a second corresponding operation according to instructions of the face detection invalidation prompt page and the face detection guidance voice; the vehicle-mounted system may display, on a vehicle-mounted display device in the form of a pop-up window, the guidance window for face authentication. The vehicle-mounted display device may include a central control screen, an instrument, a head-up display (HUD) or the like, but not limited thereto), wherein the prompt information comprises the face image (fig. 2; para 0052-0053; captured user face 205); and
obtaining the facial information from the recording (para 0012; performing, when the whole face of the current user is detected, the step of determining, according to a face feature of the current user detected by the camera device, whether a face of the current user has been associated with another account different from the current login account; outputting, when the whole face of the current user is not detected, a face detection invalidation prompt page and a face detection guidance voice, to guide the current user to adjust the sitting posture and execute a second corresponding operation according to instructions of the face detection invalidation prompt page and the face detection guidance voice).
Regarding claim 2, the method of claim 1, Rao further discloses further comprising obtaining the face image is based on the image information or a face model (fig. 2; para 0052-0053).
Regarding claim 3, the method of claim 2, Rao further discloses comprising
displaying the face image on the head-up display (fig. 2; para 0017-0018 and 0053).
Regarding claim 4, the method of claim 1, Rao further discloses comprising:
adjusting a display region of the face image based on a distance between a face position in the image information and a first region for displaying the face (fig. 2; para 0053); and
displaying the face image is displayed in the first region (fig. 2; para 0053).
Regarding claim 5, the method of claim 1, Rao further discloses wherein displaying the prompt information comprises displaying the prompt information on the head-up display based on the face attitude angle in the image information (fig. 5; para 0111-0118).
Regarding claim 6, the method of claim 5, Rao further discloses wherein displaying the prompt information further comprises displaying the prompt information on the head-up display based on a display angle of the prompt information, and wherein the display angle is based on the face attitude angle (fig. 5; para 0111-0118).
Regarding claim 8, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 1 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 9, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 2 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 10, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 3 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 11, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 4 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 12, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 5 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 6 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, the apparatus of claim 8, Rao further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to further display the prompt information on the head-up display based on a height for displaying the prompt information on the head-up display, and wherein the height is based on a face position in the image information (fig. 5; para 0111-0118).
Regarding claim 17, the apparatus of claim 8, Rao further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to obtain the image information from a camera, and wherein an angle formed by a first connection line between an installation position of the camera and a preset position and a second connection line between a position of a central control screen and the preset position is greater than or equal to a preset value (figs. 3-4; para 0009-0013 and 0066).
Regarding claim 18, the apparatus of claim 8, Rao further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to prompt the user with voice information based on the image information, and wherein the voice information guides the user to record the facial information (para 0012 and 0112).
Regarding claim 19, the apparatus of claim 8, Rao further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to:
prompt the user that a face is not detected using the head-up display when the face does not exist in the image information (fig. 7; para 0091);
prompt the user to not occlude the face using the head-up display when the face is occluded (fig. 7; para 0091); and
prompt the user with a direction in which the face to be rotated using the head-up display when a face attitude angle in the image information is greater than or equal to a preset threshold (para 0111-0118).
Regarding claim 20, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 1 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rao, et al., EP 3885206A1 in view of Huang et al., US 2019/0278094.
Regarding claim 7, the method of claim 1, Rao discloses wherein displaying the prompt information comprises displaying the prompt information on the head-up display (para 0012 and 0037).
Rao discloses claim 7 as enumerated above, but Rao does not explicitly discloses displaying the prompt information on the head-up display based on a display angle of the prompt information, wherein the display angle is based on a line-of-sight direction of human eyes in the image information, and wherein the display angle is adjusted such that the prompt information is viewable by the human eyes along the line-of-sight direction as claimed.
However, Huang discloses the head up display system including a head up display device and an eye tracking device. The eye tracking device is configured to pre-locate an initial gaze position of a driver of the vehicle before the vehicle starts moving and to detect a gaze position of the driver in real time. An acute angle is formed between the first projection position and the initial gaze position, and another acute angle is also formed between the second projection position and the gaze position (para 0006 and 0020).
Therefore, taking the combined disclosures of Rao and Huang as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the head up display system including a head up display device and an eye tracking device. The eye tracking device is configured to pre-locate an initial gaze position of a driver of the vehicle before the vehicle starts moving and to detect a gaze position of the driver in real time. An acute angle is formed between the first projection position and the initial gaze position, and another acute angle is also formed between the second projection position and the gaze position as taught by Huang into the invention of Rao for the benefit of changing a display position of the projection image as the driver's gaze shifts (Huang: para 0008).
Regarding claim 14, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 7 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, the apparatus of claim 14, Ra and Huang in the combination further disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to further display the prompt information on the head-up display based on a display angle of the prompt information (Rao: fig. 5; para 0111-0118), and wherein the display angle is based on the line-of-sight direction (Huang: para 0006).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding independent claim 1, Applicant argues that Rao does not disclose “adjusting, by a processor, a face in the image information based on a face attitude angle in the image information to generate a face image” as claimed. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated in the rejection above, Rao discloses information collection guidance guides the current user to turn a left face and to turn a right face to the lens of the camera device according to instructions of the information collection guidance; collecting left face feature information and right face feature information of the current user when the left face and the right face of the current user is detected by means of the camera device (para 0017-0018).
The MPEP 2111 states that the USPTO must employ the “broadest reasonable interpretation" of the claims. With the broadest reasonable interpretation, Examiner interprets the claimed “adjusting, by a processor, a face in the image information based on a face attitude angle in the image information to generate a face image”, in light of the specification, as information collection guidance guides the current user to turn a left face and to turn a right face to the lens of the camera device according to instructions of the information collection guidance and collecting left face feature information and right face feature information of the current user when the left face and the right face of the current user is detected by means of the camera device.
Therefore, the claimed “adjusting, by a processor, a face in the image information based on a face attitude angle in the image information to generate a face image” reads on the disclosure of Rao.
In view of the above arguments, the Examiner believes all rejections are proper and are maintained.
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 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 VAN D HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)270-1937. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-6PM.
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, Stephen R Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. 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.
/VAN D HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights