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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 11/05/2024 and 02/24/2025 has been entered and considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 08/19/2024, has been accepted for examination.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an attitude determining device”, “an imaging device”, within the claim(s).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The examiner is interpreting " an attitude determining device" as "a processor" as stated in paragraph [0027] of the applicant's specification as published.
The examiner is interpreting "an imaging device" as "a camera" as stated in paragraph [0021] of applicant's specification as published.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (2018/0031200 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Park discloses an attitude determining device/method (processor/controller [pars. 0020-22], configured to: implicitly output a notification signal (i.e. a signaling function to inform) [pars. 0003] if (optional limitation (i.e. update(s) [pars. 0013, 0037, 0048]), in an image that an imaging device (camera, [par. 0268]) has captured of a predetermined attitude determining pattern formed by a light distribution variable lamp (210, 220) (fig. 2C) that illuminates a region ahead of a vehicle with light see [pars. 0027, 0102-106], a position of the attitude determining pattern in a direction about an optical axis of the imaging device deviates from a normal position by no less than a predetermined amount [pars. 0147, 0163-164] [pars. 0180-185].
For the purpose of clarity, the method claim 6 is taught/suggested by the functions shown/stated/set forth with regards to the device/system claim 1 as rejected above as being anticipated by Park.
As to claims 2-4, Park also discloses a structure that is use in an attitude determining device (processor/controller [pars. 0020-22] device/system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the attitude determining pattern includes at least two luminous points (i.e. 112 (figs. 1, 2B-3A) [pars. 0069-72] or at least one line included in captured pattern (claim 2); wherein the notification signal (i.e. update(s)) is a signal that causes the light distribution variable lamp (210, 220) (fig. 2C) corresponding to the imaging device (camera, [par. 0268]) for which the notification signal (i.e. update(s) is output to have a lighting state different (a lighting state changes) from a lighting state held before attitude determination [pars. 0011, 0016-23] (claim 3); and wherein the notification signal (i.e. update(s)) is a signal that causes the light distribution variable lamp corresponding to the imaging device (camera, [par. 0268]) for which the notification signal is output to have a lighting state different from a lighting state held before attitude determination [pars. 0011, 0016-23] (claim 4).
As to claim 5, Park also discloses a vehicle lamp system is a vehicle lamp (figs. 1-17), comprising:
a light distribution variable lamp (210, 220) (fig. 2C) that illuminates a region ahead of a vehicle with light;
an imaging device (camera, [par. 0268]) that captures an image of the region ahead of the vehicle; and the attitude determining device (processor/controller [pars. 0020-22] according to Claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (2018/0031200 A1) in view of Tessnow et al. (2019/0128497 A1)
As to claim 7, Park teaches of a light distribution variable lamp (210, 220) (fig. 2C) that illuminates a region ahead of a vehicle with light see [pars. 0027, 0102-106], a position of the attitude determining pattern in a direction about an optical axis of the imaging device deviates from a normal position by no less than a predetermined amount [pars. 0147, 0163-164] [pars. 0180-185], and an imaging device (camera, [par. 0268]) that captures an image of the region ahead of the vehicle; and the attitude determining device (processor/controller [pars. 0020-22] that executes process and control [pars. 0025-26, 0034], as applied to method claim 6
Park fail to explicitly specify a constructional change that calibration of calibrating between a light illumination range of a light distribution variable lamp that illuminates a region ahead of a vehicle with light and an imaging range of an imaging device that captures an image of the region ahead of the vehicle, the calibration method comprising: excluding from being calibrated a set of the light distribution variable lamp and the imaging device for which the notification signal is output in the attitude determining method according to Claim 6; and for a set of a light distribution variable lamp and an imaging device to be calibrated, executing calibration excluding calibrating an attitude in a direction about an optical axis of the imaging device.
Tessnow teach of the constructional changes of calibration of calibrating between a light illumination range of a light distribution variable lamp that illuminates a region ahead of a vehicle with light and an imaging range of an imaging device that captures an image of the region ahead of the vehicle is known in the art, as evidenced by Tessnow (Tessnow, [pars. 0001, 0008-9, 0030, 0059-61] in order to ensure accuracy of measuring instrument/system match a known standard.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Park as desired appropriate such as in the manner set forth in applicant's claim 7, in view of the teachings of Tessnow in order to ensure accuracy of measuring instrument/system match a known standard, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CC1954).
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed in the attached form PTO-892 teach of other prior art attitude determining device/method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Isiaka Akanbi whose telephone number is (571) 272-8658. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur R. Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ISIAKA O AKANBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877