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 . 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, 15, 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lenser et al. (2011/0264303).
Regarding claim 1: Lenser discloses a method of displaying on a display device coupled to a vehicle, a representation of the vehicle’s movement in a constrained environment, the method comprising:
combining a 3D-model of the constrained environment with a 3D-model of the vehicle at a first location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment thereby creating a first 3D-representation of the vehicle at the first location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment (paragraph 0023);
wirelessly broadcasting information, from which the first 3D-representation of the vehicle at the first location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment, can be displayed on a display device (Paragraph 0023).
Regarding claim 2: Lenser discloses rendering the 3D-representation of the vehicle in a rendered 3D-model of the constrained environment (Paragraph 0023).
Regarding claim 3: Lenser discloses wherein rendering occurs prior to the wirelessly broadcasting step (Paragraph 0036, 0042).
Regarding claims 5 and 9: Lenser discloses wherein rendered 3D-representations of the vehicle in the rendered 3D-model of the constrained environment are at least one of: a first-person view and a third-person view (Fig. 6A, first-person view).
Regarding claim 6: Lenser discloses detecting movement of the vehicle from the first location to a second location in the constrained environment; creating a second 3D-representation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment; and wirelessly broadcasting information, from which the second 3D-representation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment, can be displayed on a display device (Paragraph 0053-0054).
Regarding claim 7: Lenser discloses wherein a representation of at least one of the vehicle’s size and orientation at the second location is different than a representation of at least one of the vehicle’s size and orientation of the vehicle at the first location (Paragraph 0053-0054, orientation).
Regarding claim 8: Lenser re-sizing at least one of: the 3D model of the vehicle and the 3D model of the constrained environment (Paragraph 0050).
Regarding claim 15: Lenser discloses wherein detecting movement comprises scanning at least part of the constrained environment using at least one of: a camera, RADAR, LIDAR and SONAR (Paragraph 0025, camera).
Regarding claim 17: Lenser discloses wherein the step of wirelessly broadcasting information comprises wirelessly broadcasting a radio frequency (RF) signal carrying said information into the constrained environment using at least one of: WI-FI, 5G, 4G and LTE, wireless communication protocols (Paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 18: Lenser discloses wherein the wirelessly broadcast information is broadcast into the vehicle (Paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 19: Lenser discloses wherein wirelessly broadcasting information, from which the second 3D-representation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment can be depicted on a display device, comprises rendering the second 3D-represenation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment (Paragraph 0033, 0053-0054).
Regarding claim 20: Lenser discloses rendering the second 3D-representation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment, prior to the step of wirelessly broadcasting information (Paragraph 0023, 0053-0054).
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.
Claim(s) 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenser in view of Hermina Martinez (2019/0355178.
Regarding claim 21: As discussed above Lenser discloses the claimed invention except wherein the display device is within the vehicle. However, Hermina Martinez discloses a similar method of displaying on a display device and further discloses the display device is within the vehicle (Paragraph 0072-0073). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the display method of Lenser in view of Hermina Martinez in order to improve user experience.
Regarding claim 22: As discussed above Lenser discloses the claimed invention and Hermina Martinez further discloses displaying on a display device in the vehicle, a rendering of the second 3D-representation of the vehicle at the second location in the 3D-model of the constrained environment (Paragraph 0072-0073).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 10-14, 16, and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael D Lang whose telephone number is (571)270-3213. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-11am and 2pm-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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. 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.
/MICHAEL D LANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667