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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the reference Roels et al [US 2019/0299483 A1] in view of Fukawa et al [US 2005/0117358 A1] does not specify or teaches “A luminous system for an automotive vehicle comprising a first headlamp intended to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a first light beam and a second headlamp intended to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a second light beam, with the first and second light beams being complementary so as to form a light beam for lighting a road, with the light beam being controlled by a control law, each headlamp including a means for projecting a wide light beam with cut-off and a pixelated projection means for a focused light beam, with at least the pixelated projection means including a plurality of selectively activatable luminous sources, the first light beam being formed by a first focused light beam having a first optical axis and a first wide light beam with cut-off, the second light beam being formed by a second focused light beam having a second optical axis and a second wide light beam with cut-off, with at least the first focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a first outer end position and a first inner end position on either side of the first optical axis, with at least the second focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a second inner end position and a second outer end position on either side of the second optical axis, wherein the control law is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement of the first focused light beam from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam from the second outer end position to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis.” (see page 9-11)
Examiner agrees:
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Applicant respectfully disagrees because although the cited references suggest a vaguely general idea and conceptual notion about what occurs with light appearance through diffusive films with similar coatings, no specific cited reference narrows the scope to the particulars of a material composition in a specific way applied to the Applicant's particular structure prior to being cured. Applicant is unable to reasonably ascertain from cited references how a completely cured wrinkled coating product is achieved with 29% or less light diffusion from a general process prior to being cured?”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
As broadly claimed, Roels discloses a luminous system for an automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a, claim 1 & Light device 1) comprising a first projector (Fig. 1a-b, 2) configured to be mounted (Fig. 1a-b, 2) the automotive vehicle (Paragraph [0032]) and able to project a first light beam (Paragraph [0074]) and a second projector (Fig. 1a-b, 3) configured to be mounted on the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a-b, 3) the second projector (Fig. 1a-b, 3) configured to project a second light beam (Paragraph [0074]), with
the first (Paragraph [0074]) and second light beams (Paragraph [0074]) being complementary so as to form a road light beam (figure 2b; [0020]: dynamic cornering lighting function), the road light beam being controlled by a control law from a controller ([0035]: central processing unit ... computer program) from automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a, claim 1 & Light device 1),
each projector projects (Fig. 1a-b, 2-3) a wide light beam with a cut-off (figure 1C; claim 1: pixelated low beam (LB)) and a pixelated projection means for a focused light beam (figure 1C; claim 1: first pixelated beam HR, [0103]: to form the kink portion LBK_CO) by selectively activated luminous sources ([0023-24]: monolithic array), the first light beam being formed by a first focused light beam (figure 2b: LBK) having a first optical axis and a first wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO), the second light beam (Paragraph [0074]) being formed by a second focused light beam having a second optical axis and a second wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO), with at least the first focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a first outer end position and a first inner end position on either side of the first optical axis (the position of the focused beam LBK is limited by the dimensions of the diode array of the light module 2) with at least the second focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a second inner end position and a second outer end position on either side of the second optical axis (the position of the focused beam LBK is limited by the dimensions of the diode array of the light module 2),
Roels does not specify wherein the control law is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement of the first focused light beam from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam from the second outer end position to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis. a first projector configured to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle
Fukawa discloses wherein the control law (Fig. 4, 2) is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement (Fig. 5 & Paragraph [0028]) of the first focused light beam (Fig. 1, 3R) from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis (Fig. 2 & Paragraph [0023]) and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam (Fig. 1, 3L) from the second outer end position (Paragraph [0029]) to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis (Fig. 2 & Paragraph [0023]). a first projector configured (Fig. 1, 3R) intended to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1, Car) and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured (Fig. 1, 3L) intended to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1, Car).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention was made to use the teachings of Fukawa with Roels to teach the control law is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement of the first focused light beam from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam from the second outer end position to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis. a first projector configured to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle for purpose of improving visibility ahead of the automobile as disclosed by Fukawa (Abstract).
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roels et al [US 2019/0299483 A1] in view of Fukawa et al [US 2005/0117358 A1]
In regards to claims 1. Roels discloses a luminous system for an automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a, claim 1 & Light device 1) comprising a first projector (Fig. 1a-b, 2) configured to be mounted (Fig. 1a-b, 2) the automotive vehicle (Paragraph [0032]) and able to project a first light beam (Paragraph [0074]) and a second projector (Fig. 1a-b, 3) configured to be mounted on the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a-b, 3) the second projector (Fig. 1a-b, 3) configured to project a second light beam (Paragraph [0074]), with
the first (Paragraph [0074]) and second light beams (Paragraph [0074]) being complementary so as to form a road light beam (figure 2b; [0020]: dynamic cornering lighting function), the road light beam being controlled by a control law from a controller ([0035]: central processing unit ... computer program) from automotive vehicle (Fig. 1a, claim 1 & Light device 1),
each projector projects (Fig. 1a-b, 2-3) a wide light beam with a cut-off (figure 1C; claim 1: pixelated low beam (LB)) and a pixelated projection means for a focused light beam (figure 1C; claim 1: first pixelated beam HR, [0103]: to form the kink portion LBK_CO) by selectively activated luminous sources ([0023-24]: monolithic array), the first light beam being formed by a first focused light beam (figure 2b: LBK) having a first optical axis and a first wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO), the second light beam (Paragraph [0074]) being formed by a second focused light beam having a second optical axis and a second wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO), with at least the first focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a first outer end position and a first inner end position on either side of the first optical axis (the position of the focused beam LBK is limited by the dimensions of the diode array of the light module 2) with at least the second focused light beam being digitally controlled by the control law in order to pivot between a second inner end position and a second outer end position on either side of the second optical axis (the position of the focused beam LBK is limited by the dimensions of the diode array of the light module 2),
Roels does not specify wherein the control law is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement of the first focused light beam from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam from the second outer end position to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis. a first projector configured to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle
Fukawa discloses wherein the control law (Fig. 4, 2) is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement (Fig. 5 & Paragraph [0028]) of the first focused light beam (Fig. 1, 3R) from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis (Fig. 2 & Paragraph [0023]) and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam (Fig. 1, 3L) from the second outer end position (Paragraph [0029]) to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis (Fig. 2 & Paragraph [0023]). a first projector configured (Fig. 1, 3R) intended to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1, Car) and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured (Fig. 1, 3L) intended to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle (Fig. 1, Car).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention was made to use the teachings of Fukawa with Roels to teach the control law is configured to generate asymmetry between, the angular displacement of the first focused light beam from the first outer end position to the first inner end position relative to the first optical axis and, the angular displacement of the second focused light beam from the second outer end position to the second inner end position relative to the second optical axis. a first projector configured to be mounted on a first side of the automotive vehicle and able to project a first light beam and a second projector configured to be mounted on a second side of the automotive vehicle for purpose of improving visibility ahead of the automobile as disclosed by Fukawa (Abstract).
In regards to claims 2. Roels in view of Fukawa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the number of luminous sources of the pixelated projection means activated by the control law for generating each of the focused light beams varies according to information relating to a change of direction of the automotive vehicle (Fig. 2b, Paragraph [0004-5 & 0007 & 0020 & 0047 & 0108] describes a device for dynamic cornering lighting in which the pixels are successively switched on and off as a function of the steering wheel angle).
In regards to claims 3. Roels in view of Fukawa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the control law is configured to activate or deactivate the luminous sources of at least one of the pixelated projection means, with the angular displacement of the corresponding focused light beam being implemented by gradually modifying the activated and deactivated luminous sources (Fig. 2b, Paragraph [0004-5 & 0007 & 0020 & 0047 & 0108] describes a device for dynamic cornering lighting in which the pixels are successively switched on and off as a function of the steering wheel angle) in gradual manner.
In regards to claims 4. Roels in view of Fukawa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 1, with the first focused light beam (figure 2b: LBK) having a first cut-off edge inclined relative to the first optical axis and the second focused light beam (Paragraph [0074]) having a second cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO) edge inclined relative to the second optical axis, wherein the control law is configured to control the light beam so that the intersection of the first cut-off edge (figure 2b: LB_CO) of the first focused light beam with the cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO) of the first wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO) moves from the first outer end position to the first inner end position, such that the intersection of the second cut-off edge of the second focused light beam with the cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO) of the second wide light beam with cut-off (figure 2b: LB_CO) moves from the second inner end position to the second outer end position (Paragraph [0088-96] the oblique edge LBK_CO of the focused light distribution LBK is able to move from one end to the other of the light distribution HR generated by the diode array of the first light module (2)).
In regards to claims 5. Roels in view of Fukawa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the angular displacement between the first outer end position and the first optical axis is greater than the angular displacement between the second outer end position and the second optical axis that is greater than or equal to the angular displacement between the second inner end position and the second optical axis, with the angular displacement between the first inner end position and the first optical axis being substantially equal to the angular displacement between the second inner end position and the second optical axis (Fukawa: Paragraph [0028-30] a greater maximum angular deflection for the right headlight (figure 5: RH, maximum angle of deflection 20°) than for the left headlight (figure 5: LH, maximum angle of deflection 10°)).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roels et al [US 2019/0299843 A1] in view of Fukawa et al [US 2005/0117358 A1] and further in view of Suwa et al [US 2019/0017675 A1]
In regards to claims 9. Roels in view of Fukawa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control law of the light beam (Fig. 1b, 4) is configured to control all the luminous sources of the pixelated projection means of the first projector (Fig. 1b, 2) when the first cut-off edge (figure 2b: LB_CO) of the first focused light beam reaches the first inner end.
Roels in view of Fukawa does not specify deactivate all the luminous sources of the pixelated projection means of the first projector
Suwa discloses deactivate all the luminous sources of the pixelated projection means of the first projector (paragraph [0415])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention was made to use the teachings of Fukawa with Roels to teach deactivate all the luminous sources of the pixelated projection means of the first projector for purpose of To prevent an oncoming vehicle from being dazzled, a boundary (cutoff line) of light on the upper side of the light distribution pattern is required to be sharp as disclosed by Suwa (Paragraph [0003]).
In regards to claims 10. Roels in view of Fukawa and further in view of Suwa discloses the luminous system as claimed in claim 9, wherein the second focused light beam has a higher luminous intensity when the luminous sources of the pixelated projection means of the first projector are deactivated (Fig. 2b, Paragraph [0047 & 0108] describes a device for dynamic cornering lighting in which the pixels are successively switched on and off as a function of the steering wheel angle).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
“wherein the angular displacement between the first outer end position and the first optical axis is greater than the angular displacement between the second outer end position and the second optical axis, than the angular displacement between the second inner end position and the second optical axis and than the angular displacement between the first inner position end and the first optical axis, with these last three angular displacements being substantially equal.” as shown in claim 6
“wherein the control law of the light beam interrupts, the displacement of the first focused light beam when the first cut-off edge reaches the first inner end position that is shifted by a first determined value relative to the first optical axis and, on the other hand, the displacement of the second focused light beam when the second cut-off edge reaches the second outer end position shifted by a second determined value relative to the second optical axis, with the second value being equal to or greater than 3 degrees of the first determined value.” as shown in claim 7
“wherein the control law of the light beam initially interrupts a displacement of the first focused light beam when the first cut-off edge reaches the first inner end position that is shifted by a first determined value and thereafter interrupts a displacement of the second focused light beam when the second cut-off edge reaches the second outer end position that is shifted by a second determined value.” as shown in claim 8.
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 WEI (VICTOR) CHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am to 6:00pm.
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, Regis Betsch can be reached at 571-270-7101. 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.
WEI (VICTOR) CHAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2844
/WEI (VICTOR) Y CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844