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 .
Applicant(s) Response to Official Action
The response filed on 01/12/2026 has been entered and made of record.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Presented arguments have been fully considered, but are rendered moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by amendment(s) initiated by the applicant(s).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 8-9, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record] and further in view of Yanagawa Hirohiko et al. [US 20030165255 A1: already of record].
Regarding claim 1, Yoon teaches:
1. A parking assistance method for a parking assistance (i.e. A parking guidance apparatus- Abstract) device that is capable of detecting an empty parking space around a host vehicle (i.e. determining a parking-available area within the AVM image- ¶0014) and is capable of displaying a first assistance icon at a position of the empty parking space in a surrounding image that is a view of an area including the host vehicle from above (i.e. The image processor 120 generates a top view image (AVM image) using images captured through the image obtainer 110 under the control of the controller 170. The image processor 120 performs image processing such as correcting a distorted image, processing, and the like- ¶0039), the first assistance icon indicating the empty parking space, the parking assistance method comprising:
detecting the empty parking space from the surrounding image (i.e. determining a parking-available area within the AVM image- ¶0014);
determining whether the host vehicle has been stopped since detecting the empty parking space from the surrounding image (i.e. the controller 170 determines whether the vehicle is stopped in operation S107- ¶0115);
determining, based on whether the host vehicle has been stopped, whether or not to display the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed at the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image after detecting the empty parking space from the surrounding image; when determining that the host vehicle has been stopped, displaying the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed (i.e. When the vehicle is stopped, the controller 170 determines a region where the parking position marker is positioned in the parking-available area, as a target parking slot in operation S109- ¶0116... The controller 170 sets a parking start position of the vehicle by using the parking position marker in operation S111- ¶0117…The display 160 displays top view image (an AVM image) output from the image processor 120 and parking guidance information. The parking guidance information includes information such as a target parking slot, a parking position marker, a point marker, a reference parking slot line (reference line), or the like- ¶0044);
generating a parking trajectory from a parking start position to the target parking position, and starting an automatic parking control along the generated parking trajectory (i.e. When the target parking slot is determined, the controller 170 sets a parking start position (initial stop position) of the vehicle by using the parking position marker M1… The controller 170 displays a point marker M2 for setting movement to a position at which the parking slot may be entered. As illustrated in FIG. 2B, after displaying the parking position marker M1, the controller 170 displays the point marker M2 and displays a point marker connection line L1 in relation to the own vehicle for steering guidance when the vehicle enters the parking slot- ¶0051-0052, Figs. 2…In the aforementioned exemplary form, the driver operates the vehicle to be parked according to the parking guidance, but the present disclosure is not limited thereto and the controller 170 may control a steering device, a braking device, and a driving device according to parking guidance to perform autonomous parking- ¶0056).
However, Yoon does not teach explicitly:
when an occupant of the host vehicle selects via an input interface the empty parking space indicated by the first assistance icon while the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed is displayed, setting a target parking position to the empty parking space selected by the occupant via an input interface.
In the same field of endeavor, Yu teaches:
when an occupant of the host vehicle selects via an input interface the empty parking space indicated by the first assistance icon while the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed is displayed, setting a target parking position to the empty parking space selected by the occupant via an input interface (i.e. In FIG. 7, a front marker M2 is a rearward movement start position marker showing the rearward movement start position S2. In this state, the rearward movement start position marker M2 is superimposingly displayed on an initial position in a center of the screen. Left and right markers M1 are parking target position markers for setting the parking target position. In FIG. 7, whether the vehicle is parked to the left direction or the right direction has not been determined. Thus, message buttons 41 and 42, of "left parking" and "right parking", are shown in the screen of the monitor 10 including the touch pad 10T. The direction which the vehicle is parked is determined based on which button, the message button 41 or the message button 42, is pressed by the occupant. Alternatively, as described below, the switching between "left parking" and "right parking" may be conducted according to a steering direction of the steering wheel 4. In case of canceling the parking assist, the parking assist is terminated by touching a message button 43 of "Cancel". The function of the message button 43 of "Cancel" is similar to the foregoing description in each display described below- ¶0050-0051).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon with the teachings of Yu so that an occupant is able to park a vehicle smoothly by only operating creep driving (Yu- ¶0003).
However, Yoon and Yu do not teach explicitly:
after starting display of the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed, causing the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed to remain displayed until a speed of the host vehicle becomes greater than or equal to a specified speed.
In the same field of endeavor, Yanagawa teaches:
after starting display of the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed, causing the surrounding image on which the first assistance icon is superimposed to remain displayed until a speed of the host vehicle becomes greater than or equal to a specified speed (i.e. For example, processing may be started when the vehicle speed is 10 km/h, and processing executed to display a bird's-eye view image for as long as the vehicle speed remains below this speed- ¶0104).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon and Yu with the teachings of Yanagawa to display a bird's-eye view image continuously, without being reset, even if the shift position changes in the course of a parking operation (Yanagawa- ¶0104).
Regarding claim 8, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Yoon further teaches:
wherein the surrounding image is displayed with the first assistance icon superimposed on the surrounding image at the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image when the host vehicle is stopped, and the surrounding image is displayed without the first assistance icon superimposed on the surrounding image at the position of the empty parking space when the host vehicle is not stopped (i.e. see fig. 15).
Regarding claim 9, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa all the limitations of claim 8 and Yoon further teaches:
further comprising: prohibiting superimposing of the first assistance icon on the surrounding image at the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image when the host vehicle is traveling (i.e. S107 (NO)[Wingdings font/0xE0]S103- fig. 15).
Regarding claim 12, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Yoon further teaches:
further comprising: prohibiting superimposing of the first assistance icon on the surrounding image at the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image when the host vehicle is not stopped (i.e. S107 (NO)[Wingdings font/0xE0]S103- fig. 15).
Regarding claim 19, apparatus claim 19 is drawn to the apparatus using/performing the same method as claimed in claim 1. Therefore, apparatus claim 19 corresponds to method claim 1, and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record] further Yanagawa Hirohiko et al. [US 20030165255 A1: already of record] and even further in view of Endo Tomohiko et al. [US 20040260439 A1: already of record].
Regarding claim 2, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a speed of the host vehicle has been zero.
In the same field of endeavor, Endo discloses:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a speed of the host vehicle has been zero (i.e. if the stopped state of the vehicle (state where the vehicle speed is zero) is detected in step 400- ¶0106).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Endo to reduce the frequency of recognition of a target parking position by the parking assist apparatus being triggered by the detection of a normal stopped state of the vehicle other than the stopped state that is intended to cause the parking assist apparatus to recognize a target parking position (Endo- ¶0022).
Claims 3-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1] further Yanagawa Hirohiko et al. [US 20030165255 A1: already of record] and further in view of Kusunoki Kiichi [US 20070119647 A1: already of record
Regarding claim 3, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a parking brake of the host vehicle has been applied.
In the same field of endeavor, Kusunoki teaches:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a parking brake of the host vehicle has been applied (i.e. The non-moving state of the vehicle is performed as follows: it is considered stopped if at least one of the following conditions is true: zero vehicle speed indicator by vehicle speed sensor 21, detection of the parked or neutral position of shift position sensor 25, or parking brake switch 27 on. If all of the aforementioned conditions are not true, the vehicle is considered to be moving- ¶0045).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Kusunoki to reduce the cost of the automatic driving position adjustment system (Kusunoki - ¶0081).
Regarding claim 4, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a shift lever of the host vehicle has been at a park position.
In the same field of endeavor, Kusunoki teaches:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a shift lever of the host vehicle has been at a park position (i.e. The non-moving state of the vehicle is performed as follows: it is considered stopped if at least one of the following conditions is true: zero vehicle speed indicator by vehicle speed sensor 21, detection of the parked or neutral position of shift position sensor 25, or parking brake switch 27 on. If all of the aforementioned conditions are not true, the vehicle is considered to be moving- ¶0045).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Kusunoki to reduce the cost of the automatic driving position adjustment system (Kusunoki - ¶0081).
Regarding claim 6, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises: determining whether a speed of the host vehicle has been lower than a specified speed; when determining that the speed of the host vehicle has been lower than the specified speed, determining whether a deceleration operation has been performed in the host vehicle; and when determining that the deceleration operation has been performed, determining that the host vehicle has been stopped.
In the same field of endeavor, Kikuchi teaches:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises: determining whether a speed of the host vehicle has been lower than a specified speed; when determining that the speed of the host vehicle has been lower than the specified speed(i.e. predetermined speed- ¶0044), determining whether a deceleration operation has been performed in the host vehicle; and when determining that the deceleration operation has been performed(i.e. vehicle speed decreases- ¶0044), determining that the host vehicle has been stopped(i.e. it is preferable to calculate the recommendation degree at a timing at which the vehicle is traveling below the predetermined speed and a state in which the target parking space is specified (a state in which the parking assist process can be executed) is obtained. This is because it is possible to estimate a timing at which the vehicle speed decreases as a timing at which the target parking space is selected because the vehicle speed decreases and the target parking space is selected- ¶0044).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Kikushi to reduce the judgment of a driver and the load of an input operation when executing a parking assist operation (Kikushi- ¶0005).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record] further Yanagawa Hirohiko et al. [US 20030165255 A1: already of record] and further in view of Kikuchi Masahiko et al. [JP 2014125195 A: already of record].
Regarding claim 5, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a speed of the host vehicle has been lower than a specified speed.
In the same field of endeavor, Kikuchi teaches:
wherein determining that the host vehicle has been stopped comprises determining that a speed of the host vehicle has been lower than a specified speed (i.e. it is preferable to calculate the recommendation degree at a timing at which the vehicle is traveling below the predetermined speed and a state in which the target parking space is specified (a state in which the parking assist process can be executed) is obtained. This is because it is possible to estimate a timing at which the vehicle speed decreases as a timing at which the target parking space is selected because the vehicle speed decreases and the target parking space is selected- ¶0044).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Kikushi to reduce the judgment of a driver and the load of an input operation when executing a parking assist operation (Kikushi- ¶0005).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record] further Yanagawa Hirohiko et al. [US 20030165255 A1: already of record] and further in view of Mario Tippelhofer et al. [US 20150379873 A1: already of record].
Regarding claim 10, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 9.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
further comprising: displaying the surrounding image on which a second assistance icon is superimposed at a position different from the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image when superimposing of the first assistance icon on the surrounding image is prohibited.
In the same field of endeavor, Mario teaches:
further comprising: displaying the surrounding image on which a second assistance icon is superimposed at a position different from the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image when superimposing of the first assistance icon on the surrounding image is prohibited (i.e. In FIG. 2, the general direction of available parking spaces in each of the sectors is represented by the position of the bars relative to the central vehicle indicator, and the quantity of the available parking spaces in that general direction is indicated by the “depth” or “height” of the bars. In FIG. 2, the visualization indicates that there are more available parking spaces directly ahead, and slightly to the left, and slightly to the right. This information may be useful, for example, when deciding at an intersection whether to turn left or right, go straight, or even go around the block and head in the opposite direction. In the illustration, the driver would most likely elect to continue straight through the intersection… A graphical abstraction representing the quantity and distance to the available spaces in each sector may be generated based on the number of available parking spaces in each sector and each space's distance from the vehicle's current position. These results are aggregated for each sector, and all sectors are normalized based on the sector having the greatest weight. The normalized results may then be presented to the driver on a display device and updated dynamically as the vehicle moves and as updated parking information is received- ¶0024-0027… FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of an in-vehicle display, 500, of the system, and FIG. 6 is a close up view of the display of FIG. 5- ¶0051).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Mario to facilitate making navigation decisions that are most likely to lead to available nearby parking spaces (Mario- ¶0019).
Regarding claim 11, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa teach all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa do not teach explicitly:
further comprising: when the empty parking space is detected and the host vehicle has not been stopped, displaying the surrounding image on which a second assistance icon is superimposed at a position different from the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image, wherein the second assistance icon indicates that the empty parking space has been detected.
In the same field of endeavor, Mario teaches:
further comprising: when the empty parking space is detected and the host vehicle has not been stopped, displaying the surrounding image on which a second assistance icon is superimposed at a position different from the position of the empty parking space in the surrounding image, wherein the second assistance icon indicates that the empty parking space has been detected (i.e. In FIG. 2, the general direction of available parking spaces in each of the sectors is represented by the position of the bars relative to the central vehicle indicator, and the quantity of the available parking spaces in that general direction is indicated by the “depth” or “height” of the bars. In FIG. 2, the visualization indicates that there are more available parking spaces directly ahead, and slightly to the left, and slightly to the right. This information may be useful, for example, when deciding at an intersection whether to turn left or right, go straight, or even go around the block and head in the opposite direction. In the illustration, the driver would most likely elect to continue straight through the intersection… A graphical abstraction representing the quantity and distance to the available spaces in each sector may be generated based on the number of available parking spaces in each sector and each space's distance from the vehicle's current position. These results are aggregated for each sector, and all sectors are normalized based on the sector having the greatest weight. The normalized results may then be presented to the driver on a display device and updated dynamically as the vehicle moves and as updated parking information is received- ¶0024-0027… FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of an in-vehicle display, 500, of the system, and FIG. 6 is a close up view of the display of FIG. 5- ¶0051).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Yanagawa with the teachings of Mario to facilitate making navigation decisions that are most likely to lead to available nearby parking spaces (Mario- ¶0019).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record], Mario Tippelhofer et al. [US 20150379873 A1: already of record] and Endo Tomohiko et al. [US 20040260439 A1: already of record].
Regarding claim 14, Yoon, Yu and Mario teach all the limitations of claim 13.
However, Yoon, Yu and Mario do not teach explicitly:
further comprising: when the host vehicle stops while the second assistance icon is superimposed on the surrounding image, terminating display of the second assistance icon.
In the same field of endeavor, Endo teaches:
further comprising: when the host vehicle stops while the second assistance icon is superimposed on the surrounding image, terminating display of the second assistance icon (i.e. e of the invention, if the stopped state of the vehicle is detected via, for example, a vehicle speed sensor, a position having a predetermined relationship with the stopped position of the vehicle occurring at the time of detection of the stopped state is recognized as a target parking position by the parking assist apparatus. Therefore, when parking the vehicle, the user can cause c position merely by temporarily stopping the vehicle so that the stopped position has a predetermined relationship with the desired target parking position. The recognition of a target parking position by the parking assist apparatus may be performed every time the stopped state of the vehicle is detected... In the fifth aspect of the invention, the parking assist apparatus may further include a display device that displays the recognized target parking position together with an actual image of surroundings of the vehicle. Therefore, it becomes possible to indicate the recognized target parking position to the user when the parking operation starts. In this case, the display of the target parking position may be carried out when the vehicle reaches the parking start position- ¶0019-20).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon and Yu with the teachings of Endo to reduce the frequency of recognition of a target parking position by the parking assist apparatus being triggered by the detection of a normal stopped state of the vehicle other than the stopped state that is intended to cause the parking assist apparatus to recognize a target parking position (Endo- ¶0022).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon Dae Joong et al. [US 20170096167 A1: already of record] in view of Yu Tanaka et al. [US 20100089677 A1: already of record], Mario Tippelhofer et al. [US 20150379873 A1: already of record] and Endo Tomohiko et al. [US 20040260439 A1: already of record].
Regarding claim 18, Yoon, Yu and Mario teach all the limitations of claim 13.
However, Yoon, Yu and Mario do not teach explicitly:
further comprising: adjusting a transparency of the second assistance icon when the host vehicle transitions from a non-stationary state to a stationary state.
In the same field of endeavor, Rathi teaches:
further comprising: adjusting a transparency of the second assistance icon when the host vehicle transitions from a non-stationary state to a stationary state (i.e. The overlays may have different colors or may change color or blink or flash or may alter in transparency or in brightness or may be animated, such as by torsion, wobbling, vibrating or jumping (such as in a manner like jelly or the like), responsive to the distance to the vehicle's rear, the speed at which possible colliding hazards or possible damage threatening objects may close to the vehicle (or that the vehicle may close to the objects), or the remaining (eventually estimated, by the trajectory in past) time until closing to an object or the like. In all three of FIGS. 12-14, the examples of the vehicle's driving path lead or progress substantially or massively up the curb at the side of the road and over the side walk- ¶0047).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Yoon, Yu and Mario with the teachings of Rathi use visual effects such as `motion blurring` and/or partially transparency in dependence of the viewing distance and direction of the virtual camera to help vision overlays (Rathi- ¶0042).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 15-17 allowed.
Claims 20-21 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8397. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30-1400.
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, SATH V PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
CLIFFORD HILAIRE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/CLIFFORD HILAIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488