Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/768,949

ROAD CONDITION WARNING ON REFLECTIVE AND AUGMENTED HEAD-UP DISPLAYS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Examiner
TIEU, BENNY QUOC
Art Unit
2682
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Gm Global Technology Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
19%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
19%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 19% of cases
19%
Career Allow Rate
11 granted / 59 resolved
-43.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
7 currently pending
Career history
66
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.8%
-29.2% vs TC avg
§103
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 59 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claims 1-4, 6-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rider et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0179066) in view of Larsson et al. (US PGPUB 2025/0058770). Regrading claim 1, Rider teaches a computer implemented method when executed on data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising: receiving road data including one or more of sensor data detected by a sensor system of a vehicle and third-party data, the road data indicating a road hazard moving toward the vehicle (Fig. 3, 350); determining, based on the road data, that the road hazard is within a roadway of the vehicle (Paragraph [--52]); determining a distance between the vehicle and the road hazard (Fig. 2A and Fig. 2B); receiving driver features of a driver of the vehicle from a driver tracker system (Fig. 1A, #24 and #26); simultaneously displaying a graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the road hazard, the graphical alert including an augmented reality image overlay and a virtual image, the augmented reality image overlay different from the virtual image (paragraph [0056]). Rider et al. fails to teach a head-up display. However, in the same field of the invention, Larsson et al. teaches a selectively visualizing safety margins that uses a head-up display (paragraph [0100]}. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to replace the display as taught by Rider by a head-up display as taught by Larsson in order to enabling improved road safety learning and driver coaching for the drivers. regarding claim 2, Rider in view of Larsson further teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the head-up displays include an augmented reality head-up display and a blackout head-up display (Larsson, Fig. 9). Regarding claim 3, Rider in view of Larsson further teaches the method of Claim 2, wherein simultaneously displaying, via the head-up displays, the graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the road hazard comprises: generating the augmented reality image overlay; generating the virtual image; and projecting the augmented reality image overlay and the virtual image on a windshield of the vehicle simultaneously (Rider, Paragraphs [0049]-[0050]). Regarding claim 4, Rider in view of Larsson further teaches the method of Claim 3, wherein projecting the augmented reality image overlay and the virtual image on the windshield of the vehicle simultaneously 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 (Larsson, paragraph [0100] and Fig. 9). Regarding claim 6, Rider in view of Larsson further teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the sensor system comprises one or more of: cameras; radio detection and ranging (RADAR); and light detection and ranging (LIDAR) (Larsson, paragraph [0100]). Regarding claim 7, further teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving vehicle data; calculating, based on the vehicle data, a trajectory of the vehicle; and determining whether the road hazard and the vehicle will interact (Larsson, paragraph [0113]). Regarding claim 8, further teaches the method of Claim 7, wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the distance between the vehicle and the road hazard and the trajectory of the vehicle, a time to interaction between the road hazard and the vehicle; and generating the graphical alert based on the time to interaction between the road hazard and the vehicle (Larsson, paragraph [0028]). Regarding claim 9, further teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein displaying, via the head-up displays, the graphical alert alerting the driver of the vehicle to the road hazard comprises displaying the graphical alert on a windshield of the vehicle to indicate a location of the road hazard (Larsson, paragraph [0055]). Regarding claim 10, further teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the graphical alert is configured to convey one or more of: a distance to the road hazard; a rate of approach of the road hazard; a severity of the road hazard; and a type of the road hazard (Larsson, paragraph [0005] and [0006]). Regarding claims 11-14 and 16-20, the limitations of the claims are rejected for similar corresponding rejections of claims 1-4 and 6-10 above. Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rider et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0179066) in view of Larsson et al. (US PGPUB 2025/0058770), and further in view of Chang et al. (US PGPub 2025/0362490). Regarding claims 5 and 15, Rider in view of Larsson fails to teach the method of Claim 3, wherein projecting the augmented reality image overlay and the virtual image on a windshield of the vehicle simultaneously comprises: determining, based on the driver features, a location of the windshield that corresponds to a line of sight of the driver; and projecting the augmented reality image overlay on the location of the windshield that corresponds to the line of sight of the driver. However, Chang et al. teaches a programmable freeform optics for head-up display where information projected onto the head-up display patch is presented near or along a normal forward facing line of sight of the operator (paragraph [0024]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to incorporate the feature include a line of sign fo the driver as taught by Chang et al. into the method disclosed by Rider in view of Larsson in order to allow the driver easy and non-distracted viewing of the displayed information. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Garrett et al. (US PGPub 2020/0164796) teaches a method for visual hazard avoidance of a road hazard is provided. The visual hazard avoidance is implemented by an on-road projection system, which is integrated into a vehicle. The on-road projection system includes a projector and a computing device. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENNY QUOC TIEU whose telephone number is (571)272-7490. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday. 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. 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. /BENNY Q TIEU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 10, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12529966
MACHINE LEARNING BASED IMAGE GENERATION FOR MODEL BASE ALIGNMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12482166
THUMBNAIL ANIMATION FOR MEDICAL IMAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12444117
SERVER-SIDE EXTENDED-REALITY PRE-COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12164983
SYSTEM LINKED ITEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 10, 2024
Patent 11550516
IMAGE FORMING METHOD AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 10, 2023
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
19%
Grant Probability
19%
With Interview (+0.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 59 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month