DETAILED ACTION
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.
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.
Claims 1, 6-11, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laine (US 20160272215 A1), and further in view of Nagano et al (US 20190235240 A1).
RE claim 1, Laine teaches A computer-implemented method when executed on data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations (Abstract, Figs 3-5, [0014]) comprising:
receiving sensor data detected by a sensor system of a vehicle, the sensor data indicating an object moving toward the vehicle (Figs 1-3, 6-7, [0028], [0084], [0087]);
determining, based on the sensor data, that the object is located outside of a line of sight of a driver of the vehicle (Figs 3-5, [0058]);
determining that a trajectory of the object and a trajectory of the vehicle will cross ([0048], [0014], [0055]); and
displaying, via displays, a graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the object that is located outside of the line of sight of the driver (Figs 3, 6, [0016], [0062]).
Laine is silent RE: head-up displays. However Nagano teaches in Figs 1, 4, abstract, [0008] that projects virtual images onto a windshield of the vehicle.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Laine a system and method of head-up displays, as suggested by Nagano, in order to display the images onto the windshield to support a driving operation of the vehicle and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 6, Laine teaches wherein the sensor system comprises one or more of: cameras; radio detection and ranging (RADAR); and light detection and ranging (LIDAR) ([0028]-[0029]).
RE claim 7, Laine teaches wherein determining that a trajectory of the object and a trajectory of the vehicle will cross comprises: receiving vehicle data; calculating, based on the sensor data, the trajectory of the object; calculating, based on the vehicle data, the trajectory of the vehicle; and determining whether the trajectory of the object and the trajectory of the vehicle cross (Fig 3, [0048], [0053], [0055]).
RE claim 8, Laine teaches wherein the operations further comprise determining, based on the trajectory of the object and the trajectory of the vehicle, a time to collision between the object and the vehicle ([0055]).
RE claim 9, Laine teaches wherein the operations further comprise generating the graphical alert based on the time to collision between the object and the vehicle ([0056]).
RE claim 10, Laine as modified by Nagano teaches wherein displaying, via the head-up displays, the graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the object that is located outside of the line of sight of the driver comprises displaying the graphical alert on a windshield of the vehicle to indicate a direction of the object (Laine [0062], Nagano Fig 4, abstract, [0039]-[0041], [0052]-[0053]).
Claims 11, 16-20 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 1, 6-10 and therefore rejected under the same rationale. In addition Laine teaches A system comprising: data processing hardware; and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the memory hardware storing instructions (Fig 2, [0017]- [0018]).
Claims 2-5, 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laine as modified by Nagano, and further in view of Ishibashi (US 20190278080 A1).
RE claim 2, Laine as modified by Nagano teaches wherein the head-up displays include a head-up display and a blackout head-up display (Nagano Figs 1, 4, abstract, [0039]-[0041]).
Laine as modified by Nagano is silent RE: an augmented reality head-up display. However Ishibashi teaches in [0006]-[0007] to display the virtual image by the head-up display as part of an augmented version of the real image..
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Laine as modified by Nagano a system and method of an augmented reality head-up display, as suggested by Ishibashi, in order to display augmented reality images onto the windshield and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 3, Laine as modified by Nagano and Ishibashi teaches wherein displaying, via the head-up displays, a graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the object that is located outside of the line of sight of the driver comprises: generating an augmented reality image overlay; generating a virtual image; and projecting the augmented reality image overlay and the virtual image on a windshield of the vehicle simultaneously (Laine [0062], Nagano Fig 4, abstract, [0039]-[0041], [0052]-[0053], Ishibashi Fig 9, [0103], [0108]).
RE claim 4, Laine as modified by Nagano and Ishibashi teaches wherein projecting the augmented reality image overlay and the virtual image on the windshield of the vehicle comprises projecting the augmented reality image overlay on a clear portion of the windshield and projecting the virtual image on a blackout portion of the windshield (Laine [0062], Nagano Fig 4, abstract, [0039]-[0041], [0052]-[0053], Ishibashi Fig 9, [0103], [0108]).
RE claim 5, Laine as modified by Nagano and Ishibashi teaches wherein the augmented reality image overlay is different from the virtual image (Laine [0062], Nagano Fig 4, abstract, [0039]-[0041], [0052]-[0053], Ishibashi Fig 9, [0103], [0108]).
Claims 12-15 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 2-5 and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (See attaches 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SULTANA MARCIA ZALALEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/Sultana M Zalalee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614