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.
Claim(s) 1, 15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Cho; Kyoungmin, US 20150015479 A1].
Regarding claim 1:
Cho discloses:
1. (Currently Amended) A signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] comprising a processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller (CPU) 212 on main board 210; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] configured to perform signal processing [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212 for controlling a general operation of the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”] for a plurality of displays (180a, 180b) [Cho: Fig.1: displays 201a, 201b, 201c, 201d, and 201e] mounted in a vehicle (200) [Cho: Fig.1; ¶ 0056: “the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 is connected, on a reflector (e.g., side mirrors 201b and 201c) or a rear view mirror 201d, on a display 201e of a navigation device, on a dashboard of the vehicle, or on a front window 201a of the vehicle by using a head-up display (HUD) or a projector”],
wherein in response to execution of an application, the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to transmit a request to execute the application [Cho: Fig.4: CPU 212 and wireless communication module 206; ¶ 0062: “ the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100”; ¶ 0069: “the driver or the fellow passenger of the vehicle may control the operation of the mobile terminal 100 by using the touch pad, keypad, or the like, provided in the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”; Examiner: The occupant’s input through apparatus 200 that launches or operates the application on the external mobile terminal 100 corresponds to transmitting a request to execute the application on the cartridge device.] to a cartridge device (300) [Cho: Fig.1: mobile terminal 100; Examiner: The mobile terminal 100 is an external device that executes applications and supplies their image, which falls within the broadest reasonable interpretation of a “cartridge device”, and Cho further contemplates other external application-executing devices connectable through external device interface unit 231 (¶ 0150: “a DVD (Digital Versatile Disk), Blu-ray, a game machine, a camera, a camcorder, a computer (or a notebook computer), and the like”).], receive a cartridge image of the application executed in the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0062: “the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100 … to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”], and display the received cartridge image on at least one of the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.1: displays 201a-e; ¶ 0071: “the driver may view the executed image of the road guidance application in a large screen of the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”],
wherein in response to input to execute a first application, the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to receive a first cartridge image from the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0070: “the fellow passenger of the vehicle may execute a road guidance application … installed in the mobile terminal 100 and allow the mobile terminal 100 to transmit an executed image of the road guidance application to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”], display a part of the first cartridge image on [Cho: Fig.7B; ¶ 0176: “displays a screen 610 displayed on the front display 201a”; Examiner: The displays are parts of the apparatus 200 and are driven by its display subsystem (display unit 201 under LCD controller 214 on mainboard 210, (¶ 0139, ¶ 0146) under the general control of COU 212 (¶ 0135), so CPU 212 necessarily performs the image output that presents this part on the first display.] a first display (180a) among the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.7B: first (front/HUD) display 201a], and display another part of the first cartridge image [Cho: Fig.7B; ¶ 0176: “displays a screen 610 displayed on the front display 201a in a region of the left mirror display 201b to which the driver's eyes have been turned, as illustrated in FIG. 7B”; Abstract: “control the second display to display at least a portion of a first screen displayed on the first display”; Examiner: The CPU 212 necessarily drives the second display to present this part, the mobile terminal having only extracted and transmitted the partial screen to apparatus 200 for output (¶ 0156).] on a second display among the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.7B: second (left mirror) display 201b].
Regarding claim 15:
Cho discloses:
15. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to receive the cartridge image from the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0070: “ allow the mobile terminal 100 to transmit an executed image of the road guidance application to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”], display a cartridge image of a first size on a first display (180a) [Cho: Fig.7B: a screen 610 displayed on the first (front/HUD) display 201a] and display a cartridge image of a second size different from the first size on a second display [Cho: Fig.7B: the screen presented in a region of the second (left mirror) display 201b; ¶ 0156: “adjust the extracted partial screen according to a ratio fitting the display to which the driver's sights having moved and transmit the extracted partial screen to the display to which the driver's sights having moved in real time”; ¶ 0190: “ a size of the screen (A) may be increased or decreased”; Examiner: Fitting the cartridge image to the differently-sized first and second displays yields a different size on the second display than the first.].
Regarding claim 17:
Cho discloses:
17. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to receive a plurality of cartridge images from the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0062: “the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100 or information regarding a destination of the vehicle or a traveling path thereof to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 through an interface”] and display the plurality of cartridge images together on at least some of the plurality of displays [Cho: ¶ 0318: “ a plurality of screens may be displayed in discriminated regions. Thus, a Java 2 micro-edition platform (J2ME platform) for simultaneously displaying execution results of a plurality of applications may be installed in the first video display apparatus, namely, the vehicle head unit (HUD). The J2ME platform has a multiple virtual machine (MVM) function and a function of simultaneously displaying execution results of a plurality of applications in a single screen”; ¶ 0319: “ the respective virtual frame butlers are integrated into a single virtual frame buffer. The integrated single virtual frame buffer is duplicated to an actual frame buffer so as to be simultaneously displayed on a single screen”; ¶ 0320: “a plurality of content images, namely, the third and fourth images, are simultaneously displayed in the vehicle head unit”].
Regarding claim 18:
Cho discloses:
18. (Currently Amended) A display apparatus for vehicles [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] comprising a signal processing device (170) [Cho: Fig.4: main board 210]
wherein the signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] comprises a processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] configured to perform signal processing [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212 for controlling a general operation of the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”]for a plurality of displays (180a, 180b) [Cho: Fig.1: displays 201a, 201b, 201c, 201d, and 201e] mounted in a vehicle (200) [Cho: Fig.1; ¶ 0056: “the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 is connected, on a reflector (e.g., side mirrors 201b and 201c) or a rear view mirror 201d, on a display 201e of a navigation device, on a dashboard of the vehicle, or on a front window 201a of the vehicle by using a head-up display (HUD) or a projector”],
wherein in response to execution of an application, the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to transmit a request to execute the application [Cho: Fig.4: CPU 212 and wireless communication module 206; ¶ 0062: “ the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100”; ¶ 0069: “the driver or the fellow passenger of the vehicle may control the operation of the mobile terminal 100 by using the touch pad, keypad, or the like, provided in the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”; Examiner: The occupant’s input through apparatus 200 that launches or operates the application on the external mobile terminal 100 corresponds to transmitting a request to execute the application on the cartridge device.] to a cartridge device (300) [Cho: Fig.1: mobile terminal 100; Examiner: The mobile terminal 100 is an external device that executes applications and supplies their image, which falls within the broadest reasonable interpretation of a “cartridge device”, and Cho further contemplates other external application-executing devices connectable through external device interface unit 231 (¶ 0150: “a DVD (Digital Versatile Disk), Blu-ray, a game machine, a camera, a camcorder, a computer (or a notebook computer), and the like”).], receive a cartridge image of the application executed in the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0062: “the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100 … to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”], and display the received cartridge image on at least one of the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.1: displays 201a-e; ¶ 0071: “the driver may view the executed image of the road guidance application in a large screen of the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”],
wherein in response to input to execute a first application, the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to receive a first cartridge image from the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0070: “the fellow passenger of the vehicle may execute a road guidance application … installed in the mobile terminal 100 and allow the mobile terminal 100 to transmit an executed image of the road guidance application to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”], display a part of the first cartridge image on [Cho: Fig.7B; ¶ 0176: “displays a screen 610 displayed on the front display 201a”; Examiner: The displays are parts of the apparatus 200 and are driven by its display subsystem (display unit 201 under LCD controller 214 on mainboard 210, (¶ 0139, ¶ 0146) under the general control of COU 212 (¶ 0135), so CPU 212 necessarily performs the image output that presents this part on the first display.] a first display among the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.7B: first (front/HUD) display 201a], and display another part of the first cartridge image [Cho: Fig.7B; ¶ 0176: “displays a screen 610 displayed on the front display 201a in a region of the left mirror display 201b to which the driver's eyes have been turned, as illustrated in FIG. 7B”; Abstract: “control the second display to display at least a portion of a first screen displayed on the first display”; Examiner: The CPU 212 necessarily drives the second display to present this part, the mobile terminal having only extracted and transmitted the partial screen to apparatus 200 for output (¶ 0156).] on a second display among the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.7B: second (left mirror) display 201b].
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(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Cho; Kyoungmin, US 20150015479 A1] in view of [Mittal; Himanshu et al., US 20200219469 A1] .
Regarding claim 2:
Cho discloses:
2. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1.
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processor (175) is configured to transmit information of at least one display to display the cartridge image and resolution information to the cartridge device (300).
Mittal discloses:
wherein the processor (175) is configured to transmit information of at least one display to display the cartridge image and resolution information to the cartridge device (300) [Mittal: ¶ 0085: “The display configurations 902 can include display settings (e.g., window size and resolution) for each physical display or virtual display. The display IDs 905 can include an identifier for each physical display and virtual display, each virtual display ID corresponding to one physical display ID”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho with the per-display identifier and resolution of Mittal so that the processor transmits information of the display and resolution information to the cartridge device. Cho requires the cartridge device to fit the image to the target display [Cho: ¶ 0156], and Mittal maintains an identifier and resolution for each display [Mittal: ¶ 0085]. The motivation would have been to enable the cartridge device to render the cartridge image at the size and resolution of the target display. The references are analogues art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and the combination would have predictably rendered the cartridge image, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3:
Cho discloses:
3. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein, in response to displaying the cartridge image on a second display (180b) among the plurality of displays [Cho: Figs.7B: second (left mirror) display 201b].
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
the processor (175) is configured to transmit information of the second display (180) and resolution information to the cartridge device (300).
Mittal discloses:
the processor (175) is configured to transmit information of the second display (180) and resolution information to the cartridge device (300) [Mittal: ¶ 0085: “The display configurations 902 can include display settings (e.g., window size and resolution) for each physical display or virtual display. The display IDs 905 can include an identifier for each physical display and virtual display, each virtual display ID corresponding to one physical display ID”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho transmit information of the second display and resolution information to the cartridge device, as taught by Mittal. Cho fits the image to the display the driver’s gaze moves to [Cho: ¶ 0156] but does not say how the cartridge device obtains that second display’s parameters; Mittal supplies them by maintaining per-display identifier and resolution [Mittal: ¶ 0085]. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to provide the second display’s identifier and resolution to the cartridge device so that the cartridge image is rendered at the correct size and resolution when shown on the second display. The references are analogues art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and the combination would have predictably so rendered the cartridge image, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Cho; Kyoungmin, US 20150015479 A1] in view of [Kim; Sujin et al., US 20180208060 A1] .
Regarding claim 4:
Cho discloses:
4. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein, in response to displaying the cartridge image on a second display among the plurality of displays [Cho: Fig.7B: second (left mirror) display 201b].
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
the processor (175) is configured to superimpose a cartridge image layer corresponding to the cartridge image and a display image layer corresponding to the display image, and display the cartridge image and the display image together.
Kim discloses:
the processor (175) is configured to superimpose a cartridge image layer corresponding to the cartridge image and a display image layer corresponding to the display image, and display the cartridge image and the display image together [Kim: Fig.2; ¶ 0072: “the layers 200 and 250 may be superimposed on each other and displayed on the display unit 150”; Examiner: The first layer 200 and second layer 250 are the superimposed imager layers display together].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho to superimpose the cartridge image layer and the display image layer and display them together, as taught by Kim. Cho already displays one screen over another in an overlaid manner [Cho: ¶ 0190], and Kim superimposes two image layers on a single display [Kim: ¶ 0072]. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the cartridge image and the display image as superimposed layers to present both concurrently on the second display without dividing it into separate regions. The references are analogues art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and the combination would have predictably displayed the cartridge image and the display image together, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Cho; Kyoungmin, US 20150015479 A1] in view of [Ahmed; Waheed et al., US 20160328244 A1] .
Regarding claim 5:
Cho discloses:
5. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to execute a cartridge client configured to exchange data with the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0081: “a client application that may be connected to a service provided by a server may be installed in the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”; ¶ 0082: “The server application of the mobile terminal may … transmit the captured screen to the client application of the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200”].
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
and a display manager to manage the plurality of displays.
Ahmed discloses:
and a display manager to manage the plurality of displays [Ahmed: ¶ 0089: “ Layout manager 357 generates the layout of applications to be displayed on one or more displays 347”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho to execute a display manager to manage the plurality of displays, as taught by Ahmed. Cho drive a plurality of displays through its processor [Cho: ¶ 0135] but does not recite a software manager that coordinate them. Ahmed provides a layout manager that generates the layout of application content across the displays [Ahmed: ¶ 0089]. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to employ such a manger to coordinate the content presented across Cho’s plurality of displays. The references are analogous art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and the combination would have predictably managed the plurality of displays, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 6:
Cho in view of Ahmed discloses
6. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 5,
wherein the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] comprises an application processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”; Examiner: CPU 212 executes the application-layer software of apparatus 200, including the client application of ¶ 0081, and is therefore an application processor.] configured to transmit a cartridge control command to the cartridge client [Cho: ¶ 0068: “the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 may receive a specific command from the driver or a fellow passenger of the vehicle through an interface, and transmits the received specific command to the connected mobile terminal 100”; ¶ 0082: “the server application may control an operation of the mobile terminal 100 based on information regarding an event occurring in the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 from a client application”].
Claim(s) 7 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Cho; Kyoungmin, US 20150015479 A1] in view of [Ahmed; Waheed et al., US 20160328254 A1] (herein Ahmed’254) .
Regarding claim 7:
Cho discloses:
7. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1.
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processor (175) is configured to execute a server virtual machine and a plurality of guest virtual machines on a hypervisor, and the plurality of guest virtual machines is operated for the plurality of displays.
Ahmed’254 discloses:
wherein the processor (175) is configured to execute a server virtual machine [Ahmed’254: Figs. 4 and 7: native HMI domain 412; ¶ 0087: “native HMI domain 412 can act as a server for the purpose of graphics”] and a plurality of guest virtual machines on a hypervisor [Ahmed’254: Fig.4: hypervisor 402 and guest domains 408, 410, 414; ¶ 0084: “hypervisor 402 provides virtual devices that enable efficient communications between the different virtual machines (guest OSs)”], and the plurality of guest virtual machines is operated for the plurality of displays [Ahmed’254: Fig.2: displays 210, 220, 230; ¶ 0033: “displays 210, 220, and 230 are three separate displays driver from multiple domains. Display content from various vehicle subsystems may be displayed on each of displays 210, 220, and 230 simultaneously”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho to execute a server virtual machine and a plurality of guest virtual machines on a hypervisor operated for the plurality of displays, as taught by Ahmad’254. Cho drives a plurality displays from a single processor [Cho: ¶ 0135] but does not virtualize that processing. Ahmed’254 runs guest virtual machines on a hypervisor, with a server virtual machine, to drive multiple vehicle displays from separate domains [Ahmed’254: ¶ 0033, 0084, 0087]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to virtualize Cho’s processor in this manner to isolate each display’s content and run the displays concurrently from separate guest virtual machines. The references are analogous art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and the combination would have predictably executed a server virtual machine and a plurality of guest virtual machines operated for the plurality of displays, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 16:
Cho discloses:
16. (Original) The signal processing device (170) [Cho: Figs.1 and 4: in-vehicle video display apparatus 200] of claim 1,
wherein the processor (175) [Cho: Fig.4: controller 212; ¶ 0135: “a controller (for example, a central processing unit (CPU)) 212”] is configured to receive a plurality of cartridge images from the cartridge device (300) [Cho: ¶ 0062: “the mobile terminal 100 may transmit execution result (e.g., a screen image or sound) of an application executed in the mobile terminal 100 or information regarding a destination of the vehicle or a traveling path thereof to the in-vehicle video display apparatus 200 through an interface”].
However, Cho does not expressly disclose:
and display the respective cartridge image on the plurality of displays.
Ahmed’254 discloses:
and display the respective cartridge image on the plurality of displays [Ahmed: Fig.2: displays 210, 220, 230; ¶ 0033: “displays 210, 220, and 230 are three separate displays driver from multiple domains. Display content from various vehicle subsystems may be displayed on each of displays 210, 220, and 230 simultaneously”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho to display the respective cartridge image on the plurality of displays. as taught by Ahmed’254. Cho receives a plurality of cartridge images from the cartridge device but displays them in discriminated regions of a single screen [Cho: ¶ 0318-0319], while Ahmed’254 displays separate content respectively on each of a plurality of separate displays [Ahmed’254: ¶ 0033]. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to present each received cartridge image on its own display so that the plurality of applications can be viewed on separate displays of the vehicle. The references are analogous art in the field of in-vehicle multi-display systems, and modifying Cho in this manner would have yielded the predictable result of the processor displaying the respective cartridge image on the plurality of displays, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 and 19 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:
Regarding claim 8:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein in response to touch input from a second display among the plurality of displays, a second guest virtual machine among the plurality of guest virtual machines is configured to execute the application, the server virtual machine is configured to transmit a request to execute the application to the cartridge device, and the second guest virtual machine is configured to receive the cartridge image of the application executed in the cartridge device and display the received cartridge image on the second display”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claims 9-11:
Claims 9-11 depend on claim 8 and are found allowable for at least the same reason as discussed above.
Regarding claim 12:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein at least some of the plurality of guest virtual machines is configured to receive the cartridge image of the application executed in the cartridge device (300) and display the received cartridge image on at least one display”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claim 13:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein the processor is configured to store the cartridge image from the cartridge device in a shared memory, and at least some of the plurality of guest virtual machines is configured to receive the cartridge image stored in the shared memory and display the received cartridge image on at least one display”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claim 19:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein the cartridge device comprises a cartridge server configured to exchange data with the signal processing device and a virtual display generator for a virtual display”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
[Li; Ping, US 20250190264 A1] discloses:
“Embodiments of this application provide a resource allocation method, an apparatus, and a means of delivery. The method may be applied to a cockpit of the means of delivery. The means of delivery may include a plurality of display areas. The method may include: allocating a first resource to a first display area, where the plurality of display areas include the first display area; and adjusting, based on a running status of an application in the first display area, the first resource allocated to the first display area. A resource scheduling method provided in embodiments of this application may be applied to a new energy vehicle or an intelligent vehicle, to improve resource utilization, and help improve user experience,” as recited in the abstract.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Koosha Sharifi-Tafreshi whose telephone number is (571)270-5897. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM to 5PM EST.
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, Nitin Patel can be reached at (571) 272-7677. 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.
/KOOSHA SHARIFI-TAFRESHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights