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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 15, and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 12, and 13 of copending Application No. 17/952,143 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of 1, 12, and 13 copending Application No. 17/952,143 anticipates claims 1, 15, and 16.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
AN 18/886,325
AN: 17/952,143
A method, comprising:
A method, comprising: at a first device including a display screen:
receiving, from a device, a rendered frame;
receiving, from a second device separate from the first device, a rendered frame, wherein the rendered frame received from the second device includes a placeholder portion;
receiving, from the device, a message including an indication of one or more modifications corresponding to a user interface element;
receiving, from the second device, a request to modify rendering of a specific user interface element such that the specific user interface element is rendered with a first appearance, wherein the specific user interface element was rendered with a second appearance before the second device was in communication with the first device, and wherein the second appearance is different from the first appearance;
rendering the user interface element;
in response to receiving the request to modify rendering of the specific user interface element, rendering, based on the request to modify rendering of the specific user interface element, the specific user interface element;
generating a combined frame by combining the user interface element with the rendered frame; and
generating a combined frame by combining the specific user interface element rendered by the first device with the rendered frame received from the second device, wherein the combined frame includes the specific user interface element at a location corresponding to the placeholder portion; and
outputting the combined frame for display.
displaying, via the display screen, the combined frame.
AN 18/886,325
1
15
16
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
AN: 17/952,143
1
12
13
Claims 1, 15, and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 15, and 16 of copending Application No. 17/952,060 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of 1, 15, and 16 copending Application No. 17/952,060 anticipates claims 1, 15, and 16.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
AN 18/886,325
AN: 17/952,060
A method, comprising:
A method, comprising: at a first device:
receiving, from a device, a rendered frame;
receiving, from a second device different from the first device, a rendered frame including a placeholder portion;
receiving, from the device, a message including an indication of one or more modifications corresponding to a user interface element;
at a first time, receiving, from the second device, a message including a second time, wherein the second time is after the first time;
rendering the user interface element;
rendering a user interface element;
generating a combined frame by combining the user interface element with the rendered frame; and
before the second time, generating a combined frame by placing the user interface element at a location, corresponding to the placeholder portion, within the rendered frame; and
outputting the combined frame for display.
outputting the combined frame for display at the second time.
AN 18/886,325
1
15
16
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
AN: 17/952,060
1
15
16
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 1 – 16 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.
Claims 1, 15, and 16 recites “one or more modifications corresponding to a user interface element” and “rendering the user interface element”. It is unclear the second instance of “the user interface element” is this first instance of “a user interface element” or is a user interface element that has been modified by the one or more modifications. Thus claims 1 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for being indefinite.
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.
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(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 – 11, and 13 – 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penilla et al. (US 2019/0265884) in view of Boule et al. (US 2021/0279024).
Regarding independent claim 1, Penilla teaches a method (Figures 18 and 19), comprising:
receiving (paragraph 86: Once the custom UI has been saved to the user account profile database 112, the user can then transfer or the manufacturer cloud services 120 can transfer the profile and custom UI to the vehicle in operation 140), from the device (paragraph 85: a smartphone or portable device having applications with the customization configuration 126 that is synchronized or pair to the vehicle), {1}a message{1} including {2}an indication of one or more modifications{2} corresponding to {3}a user interface element{3} (paragraph 82: {1}The customize configuration 126{1} will define the selected applications that were interfaced with the systems of the selected vehicle by the user 121. Once the customize configuration 126 has been selected (e.g., the APPS selected by the user to add or augment the current system APPS or system controls), the user may be provided {2}with options to customize the arrangement of {3}the UI (user interface) 134{3}{2});
rendering the user interface element (paragraph 112: where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations).
Penilla does not expressly disclose receiving, from a device, a rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose arrangements of specific components, modules, applets, widgets, code pieces which includes a Maps Apps (paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D). Boule discloses navigation application 120 generate or provide map views 232 to vehicle UI generator 130 for presentation by vehicle system 150 (paragraph 42), vehicle UI generator 130 can generate a graphical user interface (GUI 236) by combining the identified template, the map view 232, and template data (paragraph 45), and after generating GUI 236, vehicle UI generator 130 can send GUI 236 to vehicle UI module 152 (paragraph 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system to render map view from a mobile phone and to send the map view to the vehicle display for display. One would be motivated to do so because to leverage the navigation functionality of the mobile device, some in-vehicle infotainment systems (e.g., display screen, navigation system, radio system, etc.) are configured to interact with the mobile device such that the functionality of the mobile device can be accessed through the in-vehicle infotainment system (paragraph 2).
Penilla does not expressly disclose generating a combined frame by combining the user interface element with the rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations (paragraph 112) and the custom configuration can be defined by the user to provide a different background color on different days of the week, wherein the background color can be customized or replaced with pictures or photographs customized and selected or uploaded by the user (paragraph 94). Penilla field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraph 85) and is similar to Boule field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraphs 42 – 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to achieve a predictable result of generating a combined frame using the rendered user interface element and the received rendered frame by further modifying Penilla’s system that generates a frame using a rendered user interface element and an uploaded image by including the received map tile and displaying the received map tile on the vehicle display, as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
The combination of Penilla’s and Boule’s systems teaches outputting the combined frame for display (Pennilla, paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D with the substitution of the Maps Apps with Boule’s, paragraphs 42 – 46: map view that is generated by the mobile phone and transmitted to the vehicle display).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Penilla teaches wherein: in accordance with a determination that the one or more modifications includes a first modification, the user interface element is rendered with a first appearance (paragraph 87: If the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner); and in accordance with a determination that the one or more modifications includes a second modification different from the first modification, the user interface element is rendered with a second appearance different from the first appearance (paragraph 87: If the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences. In one embodiment, the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein: the first modification defines a first size; the second modification defines a second size different from the first size; the user interface element is rendered in the first size in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the first modification; and the user interface element is rendered in the second size in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the second modification, however Penilla does discloses if the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner, and if the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences, wherein the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration (paragraph 87). Boule discloses vehicle system information 102 can include information describing the display capabilities (e.g., touch input screen, high definition, low definition, display size, color capabilities, etc.) of vehicle system 150... Vehicle GUI generator 130 can generate GUIs based on UI templates 130 and adjusted for the specific display size, color characteristics, light conditions, and/or current travelling speed of vehicle system 150 (paragraph 31). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system that displays the user interface at a desired custom user interface when the vehicle is capable to fulfill all the custom user interface and if not, the provide a best-fit mapping based on the vehicle capabilities to achieve a predictable result of using a first size for a capable vehicle and using a second size base on best-fit mapping by further including size customizations based on the vehicle as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding dependent claim 5, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein: the first modification defines a first color; the second modification defines a second color different from the first color; the user interface element is rendered to include the first color in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the first modification; and the user interface element is rendered to include the second color in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the second modification, however Penilla does discloses if the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner, and if the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences, wherein the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration (paragraph 87). Boule discloses vehicle system information 102 can include information describing the display capabilities (e.g., touch input screen, high definition, low definition, display size, color capabilities, etc.) of vehicle system 150... Vehicle GUI generator 130 can generate GUIs based on UI templates 130 and adjusted for the specific display size, color characteristics, light conditions, and/or current travelling speed of vehicle system 150 (paragraph 31). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system that displays the user interface at a desired custom user interface when the vehicle is capable to fulfill all the custom user interface and if not, the provide a best-fit mapping based on the vehicle capabilities to achieve a predictable result of using a first color for a capable vehicle and using a second color base on best-fit mapping by further including color customizations based on the vehicle as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding dependent claim 7, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein: the first modification defines a first shape; the second modification defines a second shape different from the first shape; the user interface element is rendered with the first shape in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the first modification; and the user interface element is rendered with the second shape in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the second modification, however Penilla does discloses if the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner, and if the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences, wherein the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration (paragraph 87). Boule discloses vehicle system information 102 can include information describing the display capabilities (e.g., touch input screen, high definition, low definition, display size, color capabilities, etc.) of vehicle system 150... Vehicle GUI generator 130 can generate GUIs based on UI templates 130 and adjusted for the specific display size, color characteristics, light conditions, and/or current travelling speed of vehicle system 150 (paragraph 31). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system that displays the user interface at a desired custom user interface when the vehicle is capable to fulfill all the custom user interface and if not, the provide a best-fit mapping based on the vehicle capabilities to achieve a predictable result of using a first size (thus shape) for a capable vehicle and using a second size (thus shape) base on best-fit mapping by further including size customizations (thus shape) based on the vehicle as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Penilla teaches wherein: in accordance with a determination that the one or more modifications includes a third modification, combining the user interface element with the rendered frame includes placing the user interface element at a first location within the rendered frame (paragraph 83: enabling the user to customize the user interface by arranging specific components of the user interface and specific locations on the display); and in accordance with a determination that the one or more modifications includes a fourth modification different from the third modification, combining the user interface element with the rendered frame includes placing the user interface element at a second location within the rendered frame different from the first location in the rendered frame (paragraph 108: the positioning and layout or arrangement of the specific components of the user interface, whether they are system interfaces or app interfaces, may be custom arranged by the system over time based on use patterns. The use patterns of the user can be learned by the system so as to arrange the various system components and app components in various locations of the display 162).
Regarding dependent claim 9, Penilla teaches before receiving the message, receiving a layout identifying where to place user interface elements within a frame, wherein the generated frame is based on the layout (paragraph 83: enabling the user to customize the user interface by arranging specific components of the user interface and specific locations on the display), and wherein the user interface element is placed at a different location than identified by the layout as a result of the one or more modifications (paragraph 108: the positioning and layout or arrangement of the specific components of the user interface, whether they are system interfaces or app interfaces, may be custom arranged by the system over time based on use patterns. The use patterns of the user can be learned by the system so as to arrange the various system components and app components in various locations of the display 162).
Regarding dependent claim 10, Penilla teaches wherein the message includes an indication, other than a time, defining when the combined frame should be displayed, and wherein the combined frame is output for display based on the indication (paragraph 108: the positioning and layout or arrangement of the specific components of the user interface, whether they are system interfaces or app interfaces, may be custom arranged by the system over time based on use patterns. The use patterns of the user can be learned by the system so as to arrange the various system components and app components in various locations of the display 162).
Regarding dependent claim 11, Penilla teaches wherein the indication defines a next possible time (paragraph 70: These historical actions can then be used to define learned actions. The learned actions can be analyzed to change configuration settings in the user's saved profile. For instance, if the user uses a particular APP every day at a particular time, that APP icon can be surfaced to the display or preset to start. The APP can then provide information to the user at about the same time the user normally needs the information. Other historical use patterns can be monitored and such data can be saved to the user's profile. The data can then be used by algorithms that build assumptions based on historical inputs by a user as well as environmental inputs, location inputs, vehicle diagnostic inputs, internet connected marketing deals, the user's calendar, traffic conditions as well as news).
Regarding dependent claim 13, Penilla teaches detecting, via a sensor, first data, wherein the user interface element is rendered based on the first data (paragraph 92: an application can be provided to replace the temperature meters with custom temperature meters, and provide additional data on the display not provided by the standard vehicle manufacturer user interfaces).
Regarding dependent claim 14, Penilla teaches wherein the user interface element is rendered in response to detecting the first data (paragraph 92: an application can be provided to replace the temperature meters with custom temperature meters, and provide additional data on the display not provided by the standard vehicle manufacturer user interfaces).
Regarding independent claim 15, Penilla teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs (paragraphs 156, 157) configured to be executed by one or more processors of a first device (paragraphs 209, 212), the one or more programs including instructions for:
receiving (paragraph 86: Once the custom UI has been saved to the user account profile database 112, the user can then transfer or the manufacturer cloud services 120 can transfer the profile and custom UI to the vehicle in operation 140), from {2}the second device{2} different from {1}the first device{1} (paragraph 85: {2}a smartphone or portable device{2} having applications with the customization configuration 126 that is synchronized or pair to {1}the vehicle{1}), {1}a message{1} including {2}an indication of one or more modifications{2} corresponding to {3}a user interface element{3} (paragraph 82: {1}The customize configuration 126{1} will define the selected applications that were interfaced with the systems of the selected vehicle by the user 121. Once the customize configuration 126 has been selected (e.g., the APPS selected by the user to add or augment the current system APPS or system controls), the user may be provided {2}with options to customize the arrangement of {3}the UI (user interface) 134{3}{2});
rendering the user interface element (paragraph 112: where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations).
Penilla does not expressly disclose receiving, from the second device, a rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose arrangements of specific components, modules, applets, widgets, code pieces which includes a Maps Apps (paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D). Boule discloses navigation application 120 generate or provide map views 232 to vehicle UI generator 130 for presentation by vehicle system 150 (paragraph 42), vehicle UI generator 130 can generate a graphical user interface (GUI 236) by combining the identified template, the map view 232, and template data (paragraph 45), and after generating GUI 236, vehicle UI generator 130 can send GUI 236 to vehicle UI module 152 (paragraph 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system to render map view from a mobile phone and to send the map view to the vehicle display for display. One would be motivated to do so because to leverage the navigation functionality of the mobile device, some in-vehicle infotainment systems (e.g., display screen, navigation system, radio system, etc.) are configured to interact with the mobile device such that the functionality of the mobile device can be accessed through the in-vehicle infotainment system (paragraph 2).
Penilla does not expressly disclose generating a combined frame by combining the user interface element with the rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations (paragraph 112) and the custom configuration can be defined by the user to provide a different background color on different days of the week, wherein the background color can be customized or replaced with pictures or photographs customized and selected or uploaded by the user (paragraph 94). Penilla field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraph 85) and is similar to Boule field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraphs 42 – 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to achieve a predictable result of generating a combined frame using the rendered user interface element and the received rendered frame by further modifying Penilla’s system that generates a frame using a rendered user interface element and an uploaded image by including the received map tile and displaying the received map tile on the vehicle display, as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
The combination of Penilla’s and Boule’s systems teaches outputting the combined frame for display (Pennilla, paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D with the substitution of the Maps Apps with Boule’s, paragraphs 42 – 46: map view that is generated by the mobile phone and transmitted to the vehicle display).
Regarding independent claim 16, Penilla teaches a first device, comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing one or more programs (paragraph 210: Code on the vehicle electrons can execute at least some of the method operations when not connected and other operations are executed jointly between vehicle electronics (e.g., memory, code and processors of a vehicle) and cloud processing, which may implement one or more servers, either virtual or not) configured to be executed by the one or more processors (paragraphs 209, 212), the one or more programs including instructions for:
receiving (paragraph 86: Once the custom UI has been saved to the user account profile database 112, the user can then transfer or the manufacturer cloud services 120 can transfer the profile and custom UI to the vehicle in operation 140), from {2}the second device{2} different from {1}the first device{1} (paragraph 85: {2}a smartphone or portable device{2} having applications with the customization configuration 126 that is synchronized or pair to {1}the vehicle{1}), {1}a message{1} including {2}an indication of one or more modifications{2} corresponding to {3}a user interface element{3} (paragraph 82: {1}The customize configuration 126{1} will define the selected applications that were interfaced with the systems of the selected vehicle by the user 121. Once the customize configuration 126 has been selected (e.g., the APPS selected by the user to add or augment the current system APPS or system controls), the user may be provided {2}with options to customize the arrangement of {3}the UI (user interface) 134{3}{2});
rendering the user interface element (paragraph 112: where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations).
Penilla does not expressly disclose receiving, from the second device, a rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose arrangements of specific components, modules, applets, widgets, code pieces which includes a Maps Apps (paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D). Boule discloses navigation application 120 generate or provide map views 232 to vehicle UI generator 130 for presentation by vehicle system 150 (paragraph 42), vehicle UI generator 130 can generate a graphical user interface (GUI 236) by combining the identified template, the map view 232, and template data (paragraph 45), and after generating GUI 236, vehicle UI generator 130 can send GUI 236 to vehicle UI module 152 (paragraph 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system to render map view from a mobile phone and to send the map view to the vehicle display for display. One would be motivated to do so because to leverage the navigation functionality of the mobile device, some in-vehicle infotainment systems (e.g., display screen, navigation system, radio system, etc.) are configured to interact with the mobile device such that the functionality of the mobile device can be accessed through the in-vehicle infotainment system (paragraph 2).
Penilla does not expressly disclose generating a combined frame by combining the user interface element with the rendered frame, however Penilla does disclose where a display device 162 of the vehicle will illustrate and render different applications or application components in user-defined locations (paragraph 112) and the custom configuration can be defined by the user to provide a different background color on different days of the week, wherein the background color can be customized or replaced with pictures or photographs customized and selected or uploaded by the user (paragraph 94). Penilla field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraph 85) and is similar to Boule field of endeavor is with a mobile device connecting with the vehicle display that transmits data between the mobile device and the vehicle display (paragraphs 42 – 46). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to achieve a predictable result of generating a combined frame using the rendered user interface element and the received rendered frame by further modifying Penilla’s system that generates a frame using a rendered user interface element and an uploaded image by including the received map tile and displaying the received map tile on the vehicle display, as taught by Boule, and the result would have been predictable.
The combination of Penilla’s and Boule’s systems teaches outputting the combined frame for display (Pennilla, paragraph 83 and Figures 12, 13B, 13D with the substitution of the Maps Apps with Boule’s, paragraphs 42 – 46: map view that is generated by the mobile phone and transmitted to the vehicle display).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penilla et al. (US 2019/0265884) in view of Boule et al. (US 2021/0279024) and Official Notice.
Regarding dependent claim 3, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein: the first modification defines a first font; the second modification defines a second font different from the first font; the user interface element is rendered with text in the first font in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the first modification; and the user interface element is rendered with text in the second font in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the second modification, however Penilla does discloses if the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner, and if the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences, wherein the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration (paragraph 87). Examiner takes Official Notice that the concept of a user specifying a custom font style and a mapping to best fit font style is well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system that displays the user interface at a desired custom user interface when the vehicle is capable to fulfill all the custom user interface and if not, the provide a best-fit mapping based on the vehicle capabilities to achieve a predictable result of using a first font style for a capable vehicle and using a second font style base on best-fit mapping by further including font style customizations based on the vehicle as taught by Official Notice, and the result would have been predictable.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penilla et al. (US 2019/0265884) in view of Boule et al. (US 2021/0279024) and Official Notice.
Regarding dependent claim 6, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein: the first modification defines a first opacity; the second modification defines a second opacity different from the first opacity; the user interface element is rendered with the first opacity in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the first modification; and the user interface element is rendered with the second opacity in accordance with the determination that the one or more modifications includes the second modification, however Penilla does discloses if the user 121 then buys another car from the same manufacturer, the custom user interface can be transferred to the other vehicle in a seamless manner, and if the other vehicle has additional features not provided by the earlier, a mapping algorithm provided by cloud services 120 can adjust the settings for the new vehicle to match or substantially match those of the earlier vehicle based on the user's preferences, wherein the matching can be a best-fit or compatible scenario, which provides the user with substantially similar configuration (paragraph 87). Boule discloses vehicle system information 102 can include information describing the display capabilities (e.g., touch input screen, high definition, low definition, display size, color capabilities, etc.) of vehicle system 150... Vehicle GUI generator 130 can generate GUIs based on UI templates 130 and adjusted for the specific display size, color characteristics, light conditions, and/or current travelling speed of vehicle system 150 (paragraph 31). Examiner takes Official Notice that the concept of color characteristics can also include opacity/transparency level is well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system that displays the user interface at a desired custom user interface when the vehicle is capable to fulfill all the custom user interface and if not, the provide a best-fit mapping based on the vehicle capabilities to achieve a predictable result of using a first color for a capable vehicle and using a second color base on best-fit mapping by further including color customizations based on the vehicle as taught by Boule, to also further include opacity/transparency for the color as taught by Official Notice, and the result would have been predictable.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penilla et al. (US 2019/0265884) in view of Boule et al. (US 2021/0279024) and Official Notice.
Regarding dependent claim 12, Penilla does not expressly disclose wherein the layout defines a font size, and wherein the user interface is rendered with text in the font size, however Penilla does disclose rendered text with font size displayed on the vehicle display (Figure 8). Examiner takes Official Notice that the concept of setting a font size as a user preference and the advantage of accessibility to the user are well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to modify Penilla's system to include font size as a user preference in the customized configuration. One would be motivated to do so because this would provide accessibility for the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY J CHOW whose telephone number is (571)272-8078. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM-7PM.
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, Devona Faulk can be reached at 571-272-7515. 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.
/JEFFREY J CHOW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights