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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of this application’s status as a continuation of application PCT/EP2023/056712 filed on 03/16/2023.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of DE102022107700.4 filed on 03/31/2022 has NOT been received/retrieved by the office.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/26/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig.1 has not been translated to English.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract includes a paragraph number “[29]” which should be removed.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Machine Translation of FR3058106A1 hereinafter “El”
Regarding claim 1, El discloses a method for operating a light-based driver assistance system in a motor vehicle (¶1L1-2: vehicle lighting to materialize a marking, relates to field of driver assistance), the method comprising:
projecting a light distribution onto the road surface in front of the motor vehicle (¶2L1-5: projection device can be integrated into the headlights of the motor vehicle in order to illuminate the road in front of the vehicle), wherein
the light distribution generates lane markings (Page.10 L12-13: materialize a first zone marked central [403] and a second zone marked [406]), wherein the lane markings are two individual parallel lane markings at a distance (D) to one another that corresponds to the width of the motor vehicle (Page. 10 L21-24: the spacing of the marking [403] and [404] may depend on the width of the motor vehicle; for example the spacing [412] can correspond to 1.5 times the width of the motor vehicle), wherein
the individual lane markings are not a solid line. (as shown in Fig.4 for example, the marking [403] and [404] includes parallel zone of [402/[404] and [405]/[407] respectively).
Regarding claim 2, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the individual lane markings look different than normal road surface lane markings. (as shown in Fig.4 for example, the marking [403] and [404] includes parallel zone of [402/[404] and [405]/[407] respectively).
Regarding claim 3, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the individual lane markings each look different than a double line, broken line, or a pair of lines composed of a solid line and a broken line. (shown in Fig.4 for example, the marking [403] and [404] includes parallel zone of [402/[404] and [405]/[407] respectively).
Regarding claim 4, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the individual lane markings each contain at least three parallel lines. (shown in Fig.4 for example, the marking [403] and [404] includes parallel zone of [402/[404] and [405]/[407] respectively).
Regarding claim 6, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the individual lane markings each contain a pattern of separate polygonal elements. (Page.10 L25-27: the invention covers any type of marking, including discontinuous bands)
Regarding claim 8, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the individual lane markings each contain a pattern of freeform elements. (Page.10 L25-27: the invention covers any type of marking, including discontinuous bands)
Regarding claim 9, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the lane markings are generated directly by the light distribution projected onto the road surface. (Page.8 L30-31: the lighting can be adapted so that the materialized marking is at least a predetermined distance in front of the vehicle)
Regarding claim 10, El discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein
the lane markings are generated by unlit sections of the light distribution projected onto the road surface. (Page. 9 L1-6: a negative contrast marking is materialized on the road; reducing the light intensity in the marked area can involve lowering the light intensity to a level below the light intensity of lighting function) )
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over El in view of NPL “Wider Edge Lines” hereinafter “USDOT”
Regarding claim 5, El discloses the method according to claim 4,
El does not expclitly disclose:
the at least three parallel lines are of different widths.
USDOT discloses that increasing the marking width of an edge line from 4 inches to 6 inches would increase trave safety. (Page.2 L1-5: wider edge line increases driver’s perception of the edge of the travel lane and can provide a safety benefit to all facility types)
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify the parallel line disclosed by El to be an increasing width as it approaches the edge of the marking, as suggest by USDOT.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because an wider edge line increases safety. (USDOT)
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over El in view of Machine Translation of WO2020/088916A1 hereinafter “Ziegel”
Regarding claim 7, El discloses the method according to claim 6
El does not expclitly disclose:
the individual lane markings each contain a herringbone pattern.
Ziegel discloses in Fig.3 for example, a projected pattern on the road surface from a vehicle wherein the markings are in a herringbone pattern. (Fig.3: [110.3])
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to modify the markings disclosed by El to be in a herringbone pattern as disclosed by Ziegel.
One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated because the pattern can also display the intended movement of the vehicle in addition to marking the lanes and El recognizes that different marking may be used. (Page.10 L25-27: the invention covers any type of marking, including discontinuous bands)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND R CHAI whose telephone number is (571)270-0576. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Alexander H Taningco can be reached at (571)272-8048. 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.
/Raymond R Chai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Prosecution Insights