DETAILED ACTION
This Office action for U.S. Patent Application No. 18/757,510 is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination filed 28 January 2026, in reply to the Final Rejection of 2 December 2025 and the Letter of 23 December 2025.
Claims 1, 3–14, 17, and 20 are pending.
In the Final Rejection, the title was objected to as non-descriptive. Claim 18 was rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) as broader than parent claim 17. Claims 1, 3–11, 13, 14, 16–18, and 20 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0291660 A1 (“Szczerba”) in view of eeDesignIt, “How plastic LCDs are shaping new designs” (11 April 2018), https://www.eedesignit.com/how-plastic-lcds-are-shaping-new-designs/ (“eeDesignIt”). Claim 12 was rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt and in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0114193 A1 (“Joo”).
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 28 January 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the specification has been considered. The replacement title “VEHICLE DEVICE WITH DEFORMABLE DISPLAY” is acceptable and is entered.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have been considered. The rejection of claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) is moot due to the withdrawal of claim 18.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. It is respectfully submitted that US 2019/0077357 A1 (“Rupp”) discloses the claimed pressure sensor and its operation, as will be shown in full below.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to claim 13 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Szczerba in at least Figure 4A shows an operation of the adjustment mechanism 50, using a retractable rod to pull back or push forward the display. Paragraph 0077 teaches this mechanism may be duplicated for each of a plurality of screens. As will be shown in full below, this is sufficient to anticipate the claimed material.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to claim 17 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As will be shown in full below, each of Figures 15 and 21 recites the claimed “shapes” comprising a “first curved shape of the vehicle body”, a display that contains a first shape that is deformable to a planar second shape, and the display further containing a second curved shape that is adjacent to the first shape and having the same curvature as the first curved shape of the vehicle body.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 13, 14, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0291660 A1 (“Szczerba”) in view of eeDesignIt, “How plastic LCDs are shaping new designs” (11 April 2018), https://www.eedesignit.com/how-plastic-lcds-are-shaping-new-designs/ (“eeDesignIt”).
Regarding claim 13, Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt teaches a vehicle device, comprising: a plurality of displays comprising a first curved display and a second curved display (Szczerba Fig. 23, left screen 262 and right screen 266);
wherein each of the plurality of displays comprises a display unit, a backlight module, and a frame (id., Figs. 24B, 26B; frames enclosing screens; eeDesignIt, in OLCD implementation, backlight unit),
the display unit is a liquid crystal display (eeDesignIt, flexible organic LCDs described as ideal for “large-area in-vehicle displays”), and
the backlight module is disposed between the display unit and the frame (id., LCD described as having light produced independently by a backlight unit);
a cover plate covering the plurality of displays (Szczerba Fig. 23, display screens behind surface of instrument panel 22); and
a control structure connected to the first display and the second curved display, wherein the plurality of displays are deformed from a first shape to a second shape by the control structure (id., ¶ 0131; slider mechanisms 258 and 260 that adjust the screens’ curved profiles to optimize their viewing angles), wherein the control structure comprises:
a guide rail configured to control a deformation range of the plurality of displays (Fig. 9, ¶ 0097; slide track 150);
two connecting rods respectively connected to the first curved display and the second curved display (Figs. 8, 9, ¶¶ 0095–98; first end 146 and second end 148 of slider 132; additionally and alternatively, ¶ 0077, a plurality of adjustment mechanisms 50 each having rod 68); and
a driver connected to the two connecting rods and used to drive the two connecting rods to pull the first curved display and the second curved display respectively along the guide rail (¶¶ 0109–0110; Fig. 11; adjustment mechanism 50 or actuator 60),
the two connecting rods being in a contracted state (Fig. 4A, ¶¶ 0073–77, retracting a rod 68)
the plurality of displays are deformed from the first shape to the second shape (id., flattening or flexing the displays).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Szczerba to choose an LCD instead of an OLED for a flexible display for a car interior, as taught by eeDesignIt, due to higher longevity and lower cost.
Regarding claim 14, Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt teaches the vehicle device of claim 13, wherein the plurality of displays further comprise a flat display disposed between the first curved display and the second curved display (Szczerba Figs. 23, 26A; screen 264).
Regarding claim 17, Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt teaches a vehicle device, comprising:
a vehicle body having a first curved shape and comprising a cavity (Fig. 22, area between dashboard and plainly visibly curved hood or windshield);
a display disposed within the cavity (id., electronic display 246), and comprising:
a frame (Fig. 25B, frames surrounding screens 250 and 252);
a backlight module disposed on the frame (eeDesignIt, LCDs described as having light produced independently by a backlight unit); and
a display unit disposed on the backlight module (id.),
wherein the display unit is a liquid-crystal display (id., flexible organic LCDs described as ideal for “large-area in-vehicle displays”); and
a control structure disposed within the cavity and connected to the cavity (Szczerba ¶¶ 0109–110, Fig. 11; adjustment mechanism or actuator 60),
wherein the display is deformed from a first shape to a second shape by the control structure (Figs. 16–26B; various shapes and configurations that the electronic display can form),
wherein the display has a second curved shape at the first shape (Fig. 15, curved screen 178 adjacent to flat screen 180; Fig. 21, curved screen 240 adjacent to flat screen 238 or curved screen 230 adjacent to flat screen 242),
and the first curved shape of the vehicle body is adjacent to the second curved shape at the first shape (Fig. 15, curved screen 178 extends in parallel toward curved body portion of vehicle 10; Fig. 21, curved screens 240 and 230 extend in parallel toward curved body portion of vehicle 10),
and a curvature of the first curved shape of the vehicle body is the same as a curvature of the second curved shape at the first shape (id.), and
the second shape is a plane shape and has a curvature different from a curvature of the vehicle body (Fig. 15, flat screen 180; Fig. 21, flat screens 238 and 242).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to choose an LCD instead of an OLED for a flexible display for a car interior, as taught by eeDesignIt, due to higher longevity and lower cost.
Regarding claim 20, Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt teaches the vehicle device of claim 17, wherein the control structure comprises an electric cylinder, a combination of a gear, a rack and a motor, or a combination of a cam and a motor (Szczerba ¶¶ 0109–110, adjustment mechanism 50 or actuator 60 controlled automatically by system control module 46).
Claims 1 and 3–11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt and in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0077357 A1 (“Rupp”).
Szczerba, directed to a vehicle display, teaches with respect to claim 1 a vehicle device, comprising:
a first display (Figs. 23, 26A, display assembly 254), comprising:
a first frame comprising a first sub-frame and a second sub-frame (id., Fig. 26B; frames enclosing left-side screens 262 and 264 disposed within electronic display 254);
a first display unit disposed on the first sub-frame and the second sub-frame (id., actual screens 238 and 240); and
a first connecting structure connected to the first sub-frame and the second sub-frame (Figs. 23, 26A, slider mechanism 258); and . . .
a control structure connected to the first sub-frame and the second sub-frame (¶ 0131, system control module 46),
wherein the first display is deformed from a first shape to a second shape by the control structure (¶¶ 0130–131, system control module 46 adjusts electronic display 256 by moving slider 258 to optimize viewing angle).
The claimed invention differs from Szczerba in that the claimed invention specifies the display unit is a liquid-crystal display having a first backlight module. Szczerba teaches an OLED display or electronic paper display, not a liquid crystal display. However, eeDesignIt, an article on flexible displays, teaches with respect to claim 1:
wherein the first display unit is a liquid-crystal display (flexible organic LCDs described as ideal for “large-area in-vehicle displays”);
a first backlight module disposed between the first frame and the first display unit (LCDs described as having light produced independently by a backlight unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to choose an LCD instead of an OLED for a flexible display for a car interior, as taught by eeDesignIt, due to higher longevity and lower cost.
The claimed invention further differs from Szczerba in that the claim specifies a pressure sensor and its operation. The closest Szczerba comes to this limitation is that in Szczerba may adjust the resistive force for the adjustment mechanism 50 to allow for gross or fine positioning by the user. Szczerba ¶¶ 0068, 0078. However, Rupp, directed to a vehicle display, teaches with respect to claim 1:
a pressure sensor determining whether the vehicle device is subject to resistance (¶¶ 0027, 0034; crash detection), and
if no resistance is encountered, driving the vehicle device to be located at a first position or a second position (id., if the airbag is deployed, moving the display 212 to a first position; ¶ 0028, if the airbag is not deployed, the display “is readily moveable” between different positions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the Szczerba device to incorporate a lock-in-place mechanism at a certain location upon crash detection, as taught by Rupp, so the display does not interfere with operation of an airbag. Rupp ¶ 0031–33.
Regarding claim 3, Szczerba teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, further comprising:
a second display adjacent to the first display, wherein the second display is a curved display (Figs. 23, 26A; right-hand screen 266).
Regarding claim 4, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 3, wherein the second display comprises a frame (Fig. 26B, frame surrounding screen 266);
a display unit (id., screen 266); and a backlight module (¶ 0130, flexible OLED display);
wherein the display unit and the backlight module are disposed on the frame (Fig. 23, integration of components within screen 266),
and the backlight module is located between the display unit and the frame (¶ 0130, flexible OLED display).
Regarding claim 5, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 3, wherein at least one of the first display and the second display is a portion of an instrument cluster display (passim, flexible screens are components of instrument panel 22).
Regarding claim 6, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 3, further comprising:
a cover plate covering the first display and the second display (e.g., Fig. 23, display screens behind surface of instrument panel 22).
Claims 7 and 8 are directed to specific details of the construction of the cover plate, namely that the cover plate is glass or plastic, and having a certain thickness range, and radius of curvature. The examiner takes Official Notice that glass and plastic are well-known transparent materials used in the auto industry for applications like the Szczerba instrument panel. Additionally, Szczerba in at least Figs. 10–15 shows at least a portion of instrument panel 22 being curved, and the exact dimensions of the instrument panel 22 are not patentable. M.P.E.P. §§ 2144.04(IV)(change in size or relative dimensions of prior art device not sufficient for patentability), 2144.05(II)(optimized range within level of ordinary skill in the art).
Regarding claim 9, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 6, wherein the control structure comprises:
a guide rail (Fig. 9, ¶ 0097; slide track 150);
wherein the second display is disposed on the guide rail (id.);
two connecting rods respectively connected to the first frame and the second sub-frame (Figs. 8, 9, ¶¶ 0095–98; first end 146 and second end 148 of slider 132) and
a driver connected to the two connecting rods and used to drive the two connecting rods to pull the first sub-frame and the second sub-frame respectively (¶¶ 0109–0110; Fig. 11; adjustment mechanism 50 or actuator 60),
such that the second display is moved along the guide rail (Figs. 8–11, laterally sliding displays)
and the first display is deformed from the first shape to the second shape (id., flattening or flexing the displays).
Regarding claim 10, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 9, wherein the driver is a motor (¶¶ 0109–110, adjustment mechanism 50 or actuator 60 controlled automatically by system control module 46) and located on a vehicle body or in a vehicle body (Fig. 11, adjustment mechanism 50 and actuator 60 placed behind dashboard).
Regarding claim 11, Szczerba teaches the vehicle device of claim 1, wherein the control structure is a fixed track (e.g. Fig. 8, slide track 150), the fixed track comprises:
a straight track portion (id., flat portion of electronic display 126);
and a curved track portion connected to the straight track portion (id., curved portion of electronic display 126),
wherein the first display is slid along the fixed track to deform from the first shape to the second shape (id., slider or sliders change shape of electronic display to make segments flat or curved).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Szczerba in view of eeDesignIt and Rupp, and in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0114193 A1 (“Joo”).
Claim 12 recites a heat spreader. Szczerba and eeDesignIt do not teach this limitation. However, Joo, directed to a flexible display, teaches a first frame that comprises a heat spreader (¶¶ 0055–57, cooling units such as fans, pipes, or radiators).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the Szczerba system to cool the display, as taught by Joo, to assist with flexing the display by using thermal contraction. Joo ¶¶ 0048–50.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
FR 3096323 A1
WO 2021/242558 A2
US 2024/0101044 A1
The following prior art was found using an Artificial Intelligence assisted search using an internal AI tool that uses the classification of the application under the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) system, as well as from the specification, including the claims and abstract, of the application as contextual information. The documents are ranked from most to least relevant. Where possible, English-language equivalents are given, and redundant results within the same patent families are eliminated. See “New Artificial Intelligence Functionality in PE2E Search”, 1504 OG 359 (15 November 2022), “Automated Search Pilot Program”, 90 F.R. 48,161 (8 October 2025).
CN 113948564 A
US 2019/0025620 A1
US 2020/0225698 A1
US 2020/0120792 A1
US 2024/0219759 A1
US 2019/0213978 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David N Werner whose telephone number is (571)272-9662. The examiner can normally be reached M--F 7:30--4:00 Central.
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, Dave Czekaj can be reached at 571.272.7327. 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.
/David N Werner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487