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 § 102
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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Freeman et al (US 2012/0069415; hereinafter Freeman).
• Regarding claim 1, Freeman discloses a device to display an electronic image (figures 7, 10, and 12), comprising:
a head up display (HUD) device for displaying said electronic image on a transparent or translucent surface (elements 1001 and 1200 in figure 12 and ¶ 93),
wherein said HUD device comprises a collimated image (¶ 19; where ¶s 82 and 93 describe the relationship between the structure of figure 12 and ¶ 19 and ¶ 15 states “[i]n the drawings, like numerals reer to the same or similar functionality throught the several views” such that element 1001 in ¶ 93 and figure 12 is the same as in figure 10 and ¶ 82 as well as element 100 in figure 1 and ¶ 19 (note where ¶ 82 states “[s]canning projector 1001 is a dynamic scan angle projection apparatus as described above with reference to previous figures” and “[s]canning projector 1001 may be any dynamic scan angle projection apparatus described herein”)),
wherein information displayed by said device is variable (at least suggested by “video data” in ¶s 83-85), and
wherein data comprising said information is communicated wirelessly to said device from an information distribution device (¶s 83-85).
• Regarding claims 4, 5, and 8-17, Freeman discloses everything claimed, as applied to claim 1. Additionally, Freeman discloses where:
Claim 4: said transparent or translucent surface comprises a glass or a plastic (inherent in the “windshield” of ¶ 93).
Claim 5: the device further comprises a data processing device (element 1020 in figure 10 and ¶s 82 and 85) and
a data storage device (element 1030 in figure 10 and ¶s 82 and 83).
Claim 8: electronic image is projected by a solid state light source (¶ 19).
Claim 9: said electronic image is projected by a laser (¶ 19).
Claim 10: the device further comprises a diode (¶ 19).
Claim 11: the device further comprises a liquid crystal device or a plasma display device (¶ 89).
Claim 12: the device further comprises a device to communicate data to said distribution device (¶ 84).
Claim 13: the device further comprises a motion sensor (figure 7 and ¶s 56-58).
Claim 14: the device further comprises an accelerometer (figure 7 and ¶s 56-58).
Claim 15: a vehicle comprises the device of claim 1 (figure 12 and ¶ 93).
Claim 16: said electronic image is displayed on a window or windshield (figure 12 and ¶ 93).
Claim 17: said electronic image is displayed inside, outside or both of said vehicle (inherent in figure 12 and ¶ 93).
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.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman, in view of Tiana et al (US 9,244,280; hereinafter Tiana).
• Regarding claims 6 and 7, Freeman discloses everything claimed, as applied to claim 1. However, Freeman fails to disclose the additional details of the device.
In the same field of endeavor, Tiana discloses where:
Claim 6: the device further comprises a wave guide (col. 6, lines 38-43).
Claim 7: said electronic image is projected by a cathode ray tube (col. 6, lines 44-51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Freeman according to the teachings of Tiana, for the purpose of providing a seamless virtual display system (col. 2, lines 40, 41, and 52-59).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman, in view of Jeon (US 2003/0159323).
• Regarding claims 18-20, Freeman discloses everything claimed, as applied to claim 1. However, Freeman fails to disclose the additional details of the device.
In the same field of endeavor, Jeon discloses where:
Claim 18: a structure (“building” in at least ¶s 24 and 25) comprises:
a transparent or translucent surface for displaying an electronic image (“window” in at least ¶s 24 and 25) and
comprises the device of claim 1 (elements 100 and 110 in figure 2 and ¶s 24 and 25; see also ¶ 22 and the preceding rejection of claim 1).
Claim 19: the structure comprises a building (“building” in at least ¶s 24 and 25).
Claim 20: the structure comprises an inside surface and an outside surface (inherent in the “window” in at least ¶s 24 and 25),
said electronic image is displayed on said outside surface (¶s 24 and 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Freeman according to the teachings of Jeon, for the purpose of reducing the costs of changing advertisement contents on a building/structure (¶ 34).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Closing Remarks/Comments
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 NATHAN DANIELSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at (571) 272-7603. 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.
/NATHAN DANIELSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622