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
This office action is in response to communications filed 11/25/2025. Claims 1-16 and 18 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot due to new grounds of rejection.
Regarding Claim 1, the applicant argues that a portion of a trailer view might be blocked is not the same triggering event. The applicant argues that Molin does not teach the limitations and that a trigger event is used to perform the step of displaying the seamless image. The applicant argues that none of the cited prior art including Fu does not teach the limitations.
In response to the arguments, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The triggering event is not defined in the claim. Therefore, any event that triggers the display of a stitched image is a triggering event. Fu discloses turning or reversing as well as detection of an angle is a triggering event relating to a loss of view of at least a portion of the trailer. Fu discloses identifying a triggering event relating to a loss of a view of at least a portion of trailer in the rear-facing tractor image (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Figure 6-9 – turning or reversing leads to large blind area including part of trailer, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0087); stitching the rearward tractor and trailer images together into a seemingly single rear-facing seamless image (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Figure 6-9, processor determines the width of an image for blind area by the angle of axis the trailer deviates, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088), displaying the seemingly single rear seamless image using the stitched tractor and trailer images in response to the triggering event to maintain the view of the at least the portion of the trailer (Figure 8, Figure 9).
It is also noted the only section with support for seemingly single rear-facing seamless image is found in paragraph 0005 of the background. It appears that the applicant is stating that this limitation is prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “seemingly” in claim 1 (and corresponding claims 2-16) and claim 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “seemingly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fu (US 2025/0153641).
Regarding Claim 1, Fu discloses a method of displaying a trailer of a vehicle, comprising:
capturing a rear-facing tractor image from a rear-facing tractor camera (Figure 4, C, Page 4, paragraph 0068, 0071, Figure 5 );
capturing a rear-facing trailer image from a rear-facing trailer camera (Figure 4, E, Page 4, paragraph 0068, 0071, Figure 5);
identifying a triggering event relating to a loss of a view of at least a portion of trailer in the rear-facing tractor image (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Figure 6-9 – turning or reversing leads to large blind area including part of trailer, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0087);
stitching the rearward tractor and trailer images together into a seemingly single rear-facing seamless image (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Figure 6-9, Figures 8 and 9 are seamless image, processor determines the width of an image for blind area by the angle of axis the trailer deviates, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088),
displaying the seemingly single rear seamless image using the stitched tractor and trailer images in response to the triggering event to maintain the view of the at least the portion of the trailer (Figure 8, Figure 9).
Regarding Claim 4, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses
wherein the tractor and trailer cameras are provided from one side of the vehicle, and another tractor camera and another trailer camera are provided on another side of the vehicle, comprising the steps of capturing, stitching, identifying and displaying using another tractor image from the other tractor camera and another trailer images from the other trailer camera (Figure 4, Page 4-5, paragraph 0068, 0071-0072, Figure 5, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088, Figures 6-9).
Regarding Claim 5, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses wherein the trailer camera is mounted on the trailer and the trailer image includes a trailer side view (Figure 4, Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 6, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 5. Fu discloses the trailer side view includes an end of the trailer (Figure 6-9).
Regarding Claim 7, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 5. Fu discloses wherein the trailer side view includes wheels of the trailer (Figure 8, Figure 9).
Regarding Claim 8, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses the triggering event includes a trailer angle above a predetermined threshold (paragraph 0096, Figure 4, Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 9, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1.Fu discloses wherein the predetermined threshold is at least 45º (paragraph 0096). Same motivation as above.
Regarding Claim 10, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses the seemingly single rear-facing seamless stitched view provides at least the portion of the trailer using both the rear-facing tractor image from the rear-facing tractor camera and the rear-facing trailer image from the rear-facing trailer camera (Figures 6-9, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088).
Regarding Claim 11, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 10. Fu discloses wherein the loss of view includes a loss of a view of an end of the trailer (Figure 7).
Regarding Claim 12, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 10. Fu discloses wherein a loss of view includes a loss of a view of wheels of the trailer (Figure 7).
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.
Claim 2, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Fu in view of Blank et al (US 2024/0064274 and hereafter referred to as “Blank”).
Regarding Claim 2, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses a stitching step and identifying step (paragraphs 0071-0072, 0084-0088). Fu does not explicitly disclose the stitching step is performed prior to the identifying step. Blank discloses triggering event (turn signal indicator) and displaying combined/stitched images which are done prior to triggering event. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify Fu to include missing limitations as taught by Blank in order to a provide a composite image for driver safety.
Regarding Claim 13, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu does not explicitly disclose actuation of a switch. Blank discloses the triggering event corresponds to actuation of a switch by a vehicle operator (paragraph 0069 - turn signal is turn signal indicator). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify Fu to include missing limitations as taught by Blank in order to a warning system (paragraph 0069) as disclosed by Blank.
Regarding Claim 16, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu discloses stitched tractor and trailer images (Figure 6-9). Fu does not explicitly disclose the step of switching from the stitched tractor and trailer images to displaying the trailer image in response to another triggering event. Blank discloses switching from the stitched tractor and trailer images to displaying the trailer image in response to another triggering event (paragraph 0006, 0060, 0065, 0071, 0081, Figure 8-13). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify Fu to include missing limitations as taught by Blank in order to a warning system (paragraph 0069) as disclosed by Blank.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Fu in view of Molin et al (US 2015/0286878 and hereafter referred to as “Molin”).
Regarding Claim 3, Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu does not explicitly disclose the limitation. Molin discloses wherein the stitching step is performed concurrently with the identifying step (paragraph 0032). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify Fu to include missing limitations as taught by Molin in order to provide a combined image for the driver (paragraph 0003) as disclosed by Molin.
Claim 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu in view of Whitehead (US 2017/0124881).
Regarding Claim 14 , Fu discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Fu does not explicitly disclose that the displaying steps includes changing from a different displayed view on a display within the vehicle, the displaying step performed on the display. Whitehead discloses identifying a triggering event relating to a loss of a view of at least a portion of trailer in the tractor image (Page 4, paragraph 0051, Page 2-3, paragraph 0036, 0038, turning or turn signal to turn is triggering event, as the tractor loses a view of the entire side of trailer without trailer camera), wherein the displaying steps includes changing from a different displayed view on a display within the vehicle, the displaying step performed on the display (Page 4, paragraph 0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify Fu to include missing limitations as taught by Whitehead in order to have reliable detection without just driver detection (paragraph 0005) as disclosed by Whitehead.
Regarding Claim 18, Fu discloses a camera monitor system (CMS) comprising:
multiple cameras including first and second cameras respectively configured to mounted to a tractor and a trailer, the first and second cameras configured to provide first and second rear-facing fields of view (Figure 4, Page 4, paragraph 0068, 0071, Figure 5, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0087 );
at least one display configured to respectively depict at least portions of the first and second rear-facing fields of view each of which includes a portion of the trailer (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088 );
an input to provide a triggering event (Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088, turning or reversing); and
a controller in communication with the multiple cameras, the at least one display and the input, the controller including an image processor configured to provide a seemingly single rear-facing seamless stitched view of at least portions of the first and second fields of view together in response to the triggering event (Figure 1, processor, Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088, Figure 6-9 – turning or reversing leads to large blind area including part of trailer to stitch compensated image),
the at least one display configured to depict the seemingly single rear-facing seamless stitched view including both portions of the trailer from the first and second rear-facing fields of view (Figure 1, display apparatus, Page 4-5, paragraph 0071, 0072, Page 7, paragraph 0084-0088, Figure 8-9).
Fu discloses turning or reversing but does not explicitly state input.
Whitehead discloses a camera monitor system (CMS) comprising: multiple cameras including first and second cameras respectively configured to mounted to a tractor and a trailer (Figure 1, Figure 4), the first and second cameras configured to provide first and second fields of view (Figure 1); at least one display configured to respectively depict at least portions of the first and second fields of view (Page 4, paragraph 0051); an input configured to provide a triggering event (Page 4, paragraph 0051, Page 2-3, paragraph 0036, 0038 – turning or turn signal indicator); and
a controller in communication with the multiple cameras, the at least one display and the input, the controller including an image processor configured to provide a combined view of at least portions of the first and second fields of view together in response to the triggering event, the at least one display configured to depict the stitched view (Page 4, paragraph 0051, Page 2-3, paragraph 0036, 0038). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify to Fu include missing limitations as taught by Whitehead in order to have reliable detection without just driver detection (paragraph 0005) as disclosed by Whitehead.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Fu in view of Whitehead as applied to claim 14 above, further in view of Blank.
Regarding Claim 15, Fu and Whitehead discloses all the limitations of Claim 14. Fu discloses stitched tractor and trailer images (Figure 8, Figure 9). Whitehead discloses displaying step and changing displays. The combination does not disclose expanding. Blank discloses wherein the displaying steps includes expanding upon a previously displayed view on a display within the vehicle, the displaying step performed on the display (paragraph 0006, 0060, 0065, 0071, 0081, Figure 8-13, Figure 47). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in order to modify the combination to include missing limitations as taught by Blank in order to a warning system (paragraph 0069) as disclosed by Blank.
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 FARZANA HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5943. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/FARZANA HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
January 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights