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 Preliminary Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 08/12/2024 has been entered.
Response to Preliminary Remarks
Applicant's Preliminary Remarks filed 08/12/2024 concerning the Preliminary Amendment have been considered and the amendment has been entered.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 21-40 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) to not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) claim interpretation.
Regarding apparatus claims 21-26 which claim in claim 21 “an augmented reality display system, installed in a vehicle, which is configured to:” and in claim 25 “the augmented reality display system is further configured to” refer to the arguments filed on 04/10/2024 in parent application 18/309,665 on pages 8-11.
Claim Objections
Claim 38 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 38 claims “The apparatus of claim 34,” while parent claim 34 is “A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing program instructions” claim”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 35-37, 39, and 40 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.
Each of claims 35-37, 39, and 40 claim “The computer-readable storage media” while parent claim 34 sets forth “A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium”. In each of claims 35-37, 39, and 40 the claimed “media” renders these claims unclear with regard to the medium that is claimed in parent claim 34.
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.
(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 21-23, 26-29, 32, 34-36, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ann et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0226568, hereinafter Ann. A detailed analysis of the claims follows.
Claim 21:
21. An apparatus, comprising:
an augmented reality display system, installed in a vehicle, (Ann: Abstract and paragraphs [0002]-[0010].) which is configured to:
generate an augmented reality display, on a transparent surface installed in the vehicle, which comprises a representation of a simulated object at a particular position in the environment, based on monitoring a manual navigation of the vehicle by one or more occupants of the vehicle (Ann: speed bump animation, paragraph [0025] and claims 8 and 17.).
Claim 22:
22. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein:
the representation of the simulated object is generated based on a determination that one or more driving parameters of the manual navigation exceed one or more thresholds (Ann: speed bump animation is based on speed, thus, each animation is based on speed which is considered to meet BRI of threshold, paragraph [0025] “In particular, the controller 30 may also be configured to operate the augmented reality HUD 40 to display an animation showing impact that corresponds to the speed of the driver's vehicle.” and claims 8 and 17.).
Claim 23:
23. The apparatus of claim 22, wherein:
the vehicle is being manually navigated along a roadway at a speed which exceeds a threshold speed (Ann: speed bump animation is based on speed, thus, each animation is based on speed which is considered to meet BRI of threshold, paragraph [0025] “In particular, the controller 30 may also be configured to operate the augmented reality HUD 40 to display an animation showing impact that corresponds to the speed of the driver's vehicle.” and claims 8 and 17.); and
the representation of the simulated object comprises a representation of a speed control device which at least partially spans the roadway at a particular position in the roadway (Ann: speed bump animation is based on speed, thus, each animation is based on speed which is considered to meet BRI of threshold, paragraph [0025] “In particular, the controller 30 may also be configured to operate the augmented reality HUD 40 to display an animation showing impact that corresponds to the speed of the driver's vehicle.” and claims 8 and 17.).
Claim 26:
26. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein:
the augmented reality display is dynamically updated as the vehicle is manually navigated through the environment so that the representation of the simulated object remains at the particular position in the environment (Ann: speed bump animation is based on location of the speed bump on the route and based on the location of the vehicle as the vehicle is navigated along the route, paragraph [0025] and claims 8 and 17.).
Claims 27-29 and 32:
Claims 27-29 and 32 are method claim versions of apparatus claims 21-23 and 26 and method claims 27-29 and 32 are rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claims 21-23 and 26.
Claims 34-36 and 39:
Claims 34-36 and 39 are non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claim versions of apparatus claims 21-23 and 26 and non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claims 34-36 and 39 are rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claims 21-23 and 26.
Claims 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 34, 35, 37, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Desens et al., DE 102013016242 A1, hereinafter Desens. A detailed analysis of the claims follows.
Claim 21:
21. An apparatus, comprising:
an augmented reality display system, installed in a vehicle, (Desens: “Devices for augmented presentation superimpose generated additional information with a recorded and perceptible environment. The additional information is displayed in the correct position in the surrounding images, whereby the surrounding images are output in the background. Such devices are, for example, partially transparent display units, such as a HUP display unit (HUP), an HMD display unit (HMD = Head Mounted Display), or opaque display units, for example a conventional screen.” present in the translation corresponding to paragraph [0002] of the original.) which is configured to:
generate an augmented reality display, on a transparent surface installed in the vehicle, which comprises a representation of a simulated object at a particular position in the environment, based on monitoring a manual navigation of the vehicle by one or more occupants of the vehicle (Desens: FIGs. 4, 7, 8A, and 8B, a lane edge or a lane boundary maybe augmented based upon vehicle speed and curve speed,
“For example, the following limit speeds can be augmented as warnings and the distance control speed can be output in the output image A as a support: Boundary speed during cornering (= cornering speed limit): A curve speed limit for an identified leading curve is determined, for example, from map data or from traffic signs recorded in the recorded digital image Bd. In order to understand the adjustment to a cornering speed limit in cornering understandable in the output image A, in addition, a relevant lane edge or a lane boundary can be augmented by means of another virtual additional information Z7 as a warning. Here, the road boundary of the speed-limiting curve by means of the output virtual additional information Z7 in a suitable form, for. B. color, or in other design features highlighted by the representation of the real straight or less curved roadway boundary. In a further refinement, in addition, the respective limit curve speed can be augmented as a numerical value or, as shown on the basis of the additional information Z4, as a virtual traffic sign or symbol at the location of the roadway, from which the curve limit speed is relevant. The virtual additional information Z6 represents in the road area before the limit speed limit the predetermined setting speed on the basis of a lane boundary superimposed bar graph, which is augmented to the point until the limit speed limit becomes relevant. In this case, for example, the superimposed bar along the lane boundary for the setting speed (= additional information Z6) marked green as a condition indicator and marked below the bar along the lane boundary for the curve speed limit (= additional information Z7) in the curve as a warning red. The curve limit speed can be output as a warning overlaying in the output image A and can the current driving situation, the current vehicle state and / or the current vehicle position as a changing warning, eg. B. changing color from red to green or vice versa, be issued to identify a critical or uncritical driving the vehicle F own. - Limiting speeds due to a legal requirement (= traffic limit speed). Such an augmented traffic limit speed can be determined on the basis of data from a traffic sign recognition and / or a navigation map. This traffic limit speed can be output in the output image A as a state and / or as a warning overlay and can be output to the current driving situation, the current vehicle state and / or the current vehicle position as a changing indication. Depending on your own speed and a possible speed limit, the appearance of the augmentation can be varied. For example, if the driver is traveling too fast, an augmentation and thus one of the additional information Z1 to Zx displayed could change the color to red. - As a further limit speed, the relative speed due to slower preceding vehicles (= longitudinal limit speed) as additional information Zx, as exemplified above as a bar graph and / or arrow display, are output.” present in the translation corresponding to paragraph [0062] of the original,
“In a further embodiment of the invention, a further driver assistance system, in particular a lateral guidance system (lane-keeping assistant), can be additionally or alternatively supported in order to support the adaptive cruise control. In addition, existing and active lateral guidance, for example, required in the output image A as control instructions / necessary vehicle control interventions, such as corresponding steering interventions of the lateral guidance, can be visualized. The visualization can be done in a manner described above, for example by bar graphs. This z. B. that of the receiving unit 3 recorded and by means of the processing unit 4 identified edge of the lane are augmented by the virtual additional information Z10 in the form of a superimposed bar, from which the vehicle F is directed straight away, as in 7 shown. The display duration of the augmentation can be based on the duration of the steering intervention or remain visible during very brief interventions over a certain time interval away. The augmentation can be limited to the identified real roadside edge, but it can also be supplemented by the insertion of various symbols, eg. B. by arrows indicating the direction indicate the steering movement, as in 7 indicated by the additional information Z11.
In addition, in this context, a permanent augmentation of detected road edges with active lateral guidance is alternatively possible in order to make the driver aware of the readiness of the active driver assistance system and thus of the active lateral guidance. If necessary, that is, for example, too close to the edge of the roadway, then a corresponding steering intervention is automatically performed by the active lateral guidance, which is visualized for example by a color change of the respective virtual additional information Z10, so that the driver of the vehicle better perceive the function of the driver assistance system can.
In a further embodiment of the invention, the marking of the virtual road edges in the form, color and / or dimension in the output image A could change and differ, depending on Whether the current driving parameters, such as speed and curve radius, are controlled by the driver assistance system in question, ie driver intervention would probably be unnecessary, or - If it appears that in the near future, a manual steering intervention of the driver is required, for example, by decreasing the turning radius at maintained speed or acceleration at the same curve radius.
In addition, a necessary manual intervention and thus the transfer of the vehicle guidance from the assisted driving assistance system to the driver in the output image A can be augmented.
The augmented representation of required manual vehicle control interventions by the driver by means of virtual control notices can be used in autonomous driving to the handover of the vehicle guidance from the driving assistance system to the driver timely and easily understandable in the display 2 issue. In this context, an augmented warning and / or control instruction can additionally be overlaid on that location of the real roadway at which driver intervention or handover of the vehicle guidance to the driver is likely to be required. In this case, the fading in of the virtual warning and / or control information can take place temporally and locally with a specific lead, that is to say temporally and locally before the required manual intervention, in order to give the driver sufficient reaction time.
The active driver assistance system or systems can also be supported by means of a multi-level warning system in which several additional information Z12 to Z14 as warning and / or control instructions chronologically successive and event-controlled, ie depending on the current vehicle state, the current driving position and / or the preceding identified driving situation , in the sequence of output images A are displayed. 8A and 8B show two temporally successive output images A with successively displayed on the basis of the preceding traffic situation additional information displayed Z12 to Z13, the additional information Z12 represents the distance to the curve and in particular the position at the beginning of the curve, which makes a steering intervention required. The additional information Z13 represents the required steering intervention. The additional information Z14 represents the roadway area in which a steering intervention is required due to a decreasing curve radius.
In a further developed embodiment of the invention for augmented support of the adaptive cruise control with longitudinal and lateral guidance and automatic lane change, the execution of a lane change or the planned project of such a maneuver can be augmented in the output image A by means of a further virtual additional information Z15, as in FIGS 9A and 9B shown. As soon as the adaptive cruise control system activates an overtaking maneuver, for example when approaching a slower preceding vehicle (= real object O1) on its own roadway, this planned automatic overtaking maneuver can be output as a planned driving instruction in the output image A by means of automatic insertion of the virtual additional information Z15. In this case, the additional information Z15 is shown by way of example with reference to a perspective correctly positioned on the road surface arrow. As soon as the overtaking project can be carried out without risk and accordingly also started, this can be indicated by a variation of the previous graphic, the arrow.” present in the translation corresponding to paragraphs [0069]-[0075] of the original.).
Claim 22:
22. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein:
the representation of the simulated object is generated based on a determination that one or more driving parameters of the manual navigation exceed one or more thresholds (Desens: vehicle speed greater than curve speed,
“For example, the following limit speeds can be augmented as warnings and the distance control speed can be output in the output image A as a support: Boundary speed during cornering (= cornering speed limit): A curve speed limit for an identified leading curve is determined, for example, from map data or from traffic signs recorded in the recorded digital image Bd. In order to understand the adjustment to a cornering speed limit in cornering understandable in the output image A, in addition, a relevant lane edge or a lane boundary can be augmented by means of another virtual additional information Z7 as a warning. Here, the road boundary of the speed-limiting curve by means of the output virtual additional information Z7 in a suitable form, for. B. color, or in other design features highlighted by the representation of the real straight or less curved roadway boundary. In a further refinement, in addition, the respective limit curve speed can be augmented as a numerical value or, as shown on the basis of the additional information Z4, as a virtual traffic sign or symbol at the location of the roadway, from which the curve limit speed is relevant. The virtual additional information Z6 represents in the road area before the limit speed limit the predetermined setting speed on the basis of a lane boundary superimposed bar graph, which is augmented to the point until the limit speed limit becomes relevant. In this case, for example, the superimposed bar along the lane boundary for the setting speed (= additional information Z6) marked green as a condition indicator and marked below the bar along the lane boundary for the curve speed limit (= additional information Z7) in the curve as a warning red. The curve limit speed can be output as a warning overlaying in the output image A and can the current driving situation, the current vehicle state and / or the current vehicle position as a changing warning, eg. B. changing color from red to green or vice versa, be issued to identify a critical or uncritical driving the vehicle F own. - Limiting speeds due to a legal requirement (= traffic limit speed). Such an augmented traffic limit speed can be determined on the basis of data from a traffic sign recognition and / or a navigation map. This traffic limit speed can be output in the output image A as a state and / or as a warning overlay and can be output to the current driving situation, the current vehicle state and / or the current vehicle position as a changing indication. Depending on your own speed and a possible speed limit, the appearance of the augmentation can be varied. For example, if the driver is traveling too fast, an augmentation and thus one of the additional information Z1 to Zx displayed could change the color to red. - As a further limit speed, the relative speed due to slower preceding vehicles (= longitudinal limit speed) as additional information Zx, as exemplified above as a bar graph and / or arrow display, are output.” present in the translation corresponding to paragraph [0062] of the original.).
Claim 24;
24. The apparatus of claim 22, wherein:
the representation of the simulated object is generated based on a determination that the vehicle is being manually navigated within a proximity of a lane boundary (Desens: FIGs. 4, 7, 8A, and 8B, a lane edge or a lane boundary maybe augmented based upon vehicle speed and curve speed.); and
the representation of the simulated object comprises a representation of one or more lane indicator devices located along the lane boundary (Desens: FIGs. 4, 7, 8A, and 8B, a lane edge or a lane boundary maybe augmented based upon vehicle speed and curve speed.).
Claim 26:
26. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein:
the augmented reality display is dynamically updated as the vehicle is manually navigated through the environment so that the representation of the simulated object remains at the particular position in the environment (Desens: FIGs. 4, 7, 8A, and 8B, a lane edge or a lane boundary maybe augmented refer to Z6, Z7, Z10, Z11, and Z14 based upon vehicle speed and curve speed as the vehicle is navigated along the road.).
Claims 27, 28, 30, and 32:
Claim 27, 28, 30, and 32 are method claim versions of apparatus claims 21, 22, 24, and 26 and method claims 27, 28, 30, and 32 are rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claims 21, 22, 24, and 26.
Claims 34, 35, 37, and 39:
Claims 34, 35, 37, and 39 are non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claim versions of apparatus claims 21, 22, 24, and 26 and non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claims 34, 35, 37, and 39 are rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claims 21, 22, 24, and 26.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ann et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0226568, hereinafter Ann, in view of Szczerba et al. US Patent No. 8,098,171, hereinafter Szczerba. A detailed analysis of the claims follows.
Claim 33:
33. The method of claim 27, further comprising:
dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to environmental conditions (Ann: Silent. Szczerba: dynamically updating augmented reality display on windscreen head-up display in response to poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions, “Poor viewing conditions can include any condition which affects or diminishes the operator or occupant of the vehicle's visibility of the driving scene. For instance, viewing conditions can be detected as poor during nighttime, dusk and dawn. Additionally, viewing conditions can be detected as poor during adverse weather conditions such as rain, snow and fog. Viewing conditions can also be determined as poor when a vehicle is travelling through a tunnel or other hindrance that may affect viewing conditions.” described at column 1 lines 16-23 and refer to column 9 lines 24-32 and column 10 line 44 to column 11 line 9.) or occupant cognitive load (Ann: Silent. Szczerba: driving in poor viewing conditions environmental conditions increases driver/occupant cognitive load, refer to column 1 lines 22-23 “Awareness of traffic patterns can be vastly diminished during poor viewing conditions.” and dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to environmental conditions meets the BRI of this alternative claim limitation’s claimed dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to occupant cognitive load.).
Szczerba describes enhancing a driver’s/occupant’s awareness during poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions refer to column 1 lines 16-23, column 9 lines 24-32, and column 10 line 44 to column 11 line 9 by dynamically updating augmented reality display on windscreen head-up display in response to poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Szczerba to modify Ann to perform dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to environmental conditions because this will enhance the driver’s awareness of the traffic surrounding the vehicle as discussed by Szczerba at column 1 lines 14-23 with the added benefit of reducing driver’s/occupant’s cognitive load.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desens et al., DE 102013016242 A1, hereinafter Desens, in view of Szczerba et al. US Patent No. 8,098,171, hereinafter Szczerba. A detailed analysis of the claims follows.
Claim 33:
33. The method of claim 27, further comprising:
dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to
environmental conditions (Desens: Silent. Szczerba: dynamically updating augmented reality display on windscreen head-up display in response to poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions, “Poor viewing conditions can include any condition which affects or diminishes the operator or occupant of the vehicle's visibility of the driving scene. For instance, viewing conditions can be detected as poor during nighttime, dusk and dawn. Additionally, viewing conditions can be detected as poor during adverse weather conditions such as rain, snow and fog. Viewing conditions can also be determined as poor when a vehicle is travelling through a tunnel or other hindrance that may affect viewing conditions.” described at column 1 lines 16-23 and refer to column 9 lines 24-32 and column 10 line 44 to column 11 line 9.) or occupant cognitive load (Desens: Silent. Szczerba: driving in poor viewing conditions environmental conditions increases driver/occupant cognitive load, refer to column 1 lines 22-23 “Awareness of traffic patterns can be vastly diminished during poor viewing conditions.” and dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to environmental conditions meets the BRI of this alternative claim limitation’s claimed dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to occupant cognitive load.).
Szczerba describes enhancing a driver’s/occupant’s awareness during poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions refer to column 1 lines 16-23, column 9 lines 24-32, and column 10 line 44 to column 11 line 9 by dynamically updating augmented reality display on windscreen head-up display in response to poor viewing conditions based on environmental conditions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Szczerba to modify Desens to perform dynamically updating the augmented reality display in response to environmental conditions because this will enhance the driver’s awareness of the traffic surrounding the vehicle as discussed by Szczerba at column 1 lines 14-23 with the added benefit of reducing driver’s/occupant’s cognitive load.
Claims 25, 31, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ann et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0226568, hereinafter Ann, in view of Kondoh et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0050110, hereinafter Kondoh. A detailed analysis of the claims follows.
Claim
25. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein:
the representation of the simulated object comprises a representation of a simulated object which at least partially spans the roadway at a particular position in the roadway (Ann: animation of the virtual preceding vehicle meets the BRI of the claimed “a simulated object which at least partially spans the roadway at a particular position in the roadway”, refer to paragraph [0025] and claims 8 and 17. Kondoh: displays vehicle speed and vehicle speed warnings on a display in the instrument panel and audio vehicle speed warnings from a speaker but silent as to the claimed “simulated object which at least partially spans the roadway at a particular position in the roadway”, refer to Figs. 9 and 12-15 and paragraphs [0088], [0106], and [0121].);
the augmented reality display system is further configured to command an active suspension system, wherein the active suspension system controls suspension of at least one wheel installed in the vehicle, to execute a sequence of actuations to simulate the vehicle passing over the simulated object, in response to a determination that the vehicle is moving over the particular position in the roadway (Ann: Silent. Kondoh: active suspension is used to make virtual speed bumps, speed humps, and rumble strips to simulate the vehicle passing over the simulated object, refer to paragraphs [0040], [0045], [0046] and Figs. 9 and 12-15.).
Kondoh describes using active suspension to assist a driver with respect to the operation of a vehicle and that urges a driver to slow down (decelerate) in selected locations, refer to paragraph [0002].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Kondoh to modify Ann to command an active suspension system, wherein the active suspension system controls suspension of at least one wheel installed in the vehicle, to execute a sequence of actuations to simulate the vehicle passing over the simulated object, in response to a determination that the vehicle is moving over the particular position in the roadway to assist a driver with respect to the operation of a vehicle and that urges a driver to slow down (decelerate) in selected locations, refer to paragraph [0002] of Kondoh.
Claim 31:
Claim 31 is a method claim version of apparatus claims 25 and method claim 31 is rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claim 25.
Claim 38:
Claim 38 is a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claim version of apparatus claim 25 and non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium claim 38 is rejected for the same rationale given for apparatus claim 25
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
Claim 40 introduced in the preliminary amendment filed after the filing of this application is not supported by the priority nonprovisional applications 18/309,665, 17/315,159, and 15/762,543 as well as PCT/US2016/053182 and provisional 62/232,855.
Claim 40:
40. The computer-readable storage media of claim 34, wherein:
a user device in communication with the vehicle provides the one or more processors with access to the program instructions.
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application Nos. 18/309,665, 17/315,159, and 15/762,543 as well as PCT/US2016/053182 and provisional 62/232,855, fail to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. Claim 40 claims “a user device in communication with the vehicle provides the one or more processors with access to the program instructions.” which is not described nor conveyed by the parent applications. Accordingly, claim 40 is not entitled to the benefit of the prior applications.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 40 introduced in the preliminary amendment filed after the filing of this application is not supported by this applicant’s written description.
Claim 40:
40. The computer-readable storage media of claim 34, wherein:
a user device in communication with the vehicle provides the one or more processors with access to the program instructions.
The written disclosure of this application and the prior-filed application, Application Nos. 18/309,665, 17/315,159, and 15/762,543 as well as PCT/US2016/053182 and provisional 62/232,855, fail to provide adequate support for the claimed “a user device in communication with the vehicle provides the one or more processors with access to the program instructions.”, refer to the description of the embodiment covered by parent claim 34 which is directed to FIGs. 7A to 7B described in paragraphs [0065]-[0071].
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Weidlich, EP 2374695 A1, describes virtual lane markings 33 displayed on the windshield 32 illustrated in FIG. 4.
Yang et al., DE 102009027026 A1, describes virtual lane marking 213 displayed on the windshield illustrated in FIG. 2.
Ishii et al., JP 2005148973 A, describes four overspeed indicators M displayed on the windshield illustrated in FIG. 5, 11, and 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFERY A BRIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7656. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:30am-3:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xiao M Wu, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7761. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
JEFFERY A. BRIER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2613
/JEFFERY A BRIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613