DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
OLED and LCD displays, denoted as 30A and 30B respectively, are mentioned in paragraph 0036 of the specification, but do not appear in the drawings
Cap, denoted as 96, is mentioned in paragraph 0041 of the specification, but does not appear in the drawings
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. 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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al. (JP 2020138562 A).
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka teaches “A vehicle display system comprising:
an instrument panel substrate configured to extend between first and second front support pillars in a vehicle below a windshield and configured to be supported by a cross-car beam (housing unit is supported by beam body, see paragraph 0019);
a sound stage configured to be supported by the cross-car beam (sound stage is disposed inside housing unit, supported by beam body, see paragraph 0010);
a plurality of brackets configured to be supported by the cross-car beam (housing unit support bracket connects to beam body, see paragraph 0027); and
an electronic display substantially configured to extend between the first and second front support pillars and be supported by the plurality of brackets (display panel is mounted on fixing portion of housing unit and thus is placed between front support pillars, see paragraph 0026, side bracket, see paragraph 0019) such that the electronic display is elevated above at least a portion of the instrument panel substrate (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 1), wherein the electronic display is vehicle rearward of the sound stage (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 1).”
PNG
media_image1.png
732
863
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 1
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of brackets comprises a plurality of cross-car beam brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 1) connected to a plurality of display brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 2).”
PNG
media_image2.png
510
880
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 1
PNG
media_image3.png
589
863
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 2
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 4, wherein the plurality of brackets comprises first and second cross-car beams brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 1) and first and second display brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 2).”
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 1, wherein the sound stage is spaced from the electronic display by a gap (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 3).”
PNG
media_image4.png
589
881
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 3
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 6, wherein an upper end of the sound stage is angled vehicle forward away from the electronic display (See Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 4).”
PNG
media_image5.png
589
863
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 4
Regarding claim 8, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 6, wherein the sound stage comprises one or more audio speakers (speaker, see paragraph 0010).”
Regarding claim 9, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 7, further comprising an instrument panel topper on the instrument panel substrate (cover is mounted on housing body, see paragraph 0044).”
Regarding claim 10, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 1, wherein the electronic display is further connected to the instrument panel substrate (display panel is mounted on fixing portion of housing unit, see paragraph 0026).”
Regarding claim 11, Tanaka teaches “A vehicle comprising:
a body defining a passenger compartment having first and second front support pillars on opposite sides on a front side of the passenger compartment (vehicle structure comprises front pillars, see paragraph 0020);
a windshield connected to the body and located between the first and second front support pillars (see Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 2);
an instrument panel substrate generally extending between the first and second front support pillars below the windshield (housing body is disposed between support pillar brackets and thus support pillars, see paragraph 0019);
a cross beam extending between the first and second front support pillars (beam body spans side brackets and thus side support pillars, see paragraph 0019);
a sound stage supported on the cross-car beam (sound stage is disposed inside housing unit, supported by beam body, see paragraph 0010);
a plurality of brackets supported by the cross beam (plurality of support brackets extend from beam, see paragraph 0019); and
an electronic display substantially extending between the first and second support pillars and supported by the plurality of brackets (display panel is mounted on fixing portion of housing unit and thus is placed between front support pillars, see paragraph 0026, side bracket, see paragraph 0019) such that the electronic display is elevated above at least a portion of the instrument panel substrate (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 1), wherein the electronic display is vehicle rearward of the sound stage (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 1).”
PNG
media_image6.png
510
880
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 2
Regarding claim 14, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 11, wherein the plurality of brackets comprises a plurality of cross-car beam brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 1) connected to a plurality of display brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 2).”
Regarding claim 15, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 14, wherein the plurality of brackets comprises first and second cross-car beams brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 1, Annotation Set 1) and first and second display brackets (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 2).”
Regarding claim 16, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle of claim 11, wherein the sound stage is spaced from the electronic display (see Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 3).”
Regarding claim 17, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle of claim 16, wherein an upper end of the sound stage is angled vehicle forward away from the electronic display (See Tanaka, Figure 2, Annotation Set 4).”
Regarding claim 18, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle of claim 17, wherein the sound stage comprises one or more audio speakers (speaker, see paragraph 0010).”
Regarding claim 19, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle of claim 16, further comprising an instrument panel topper on the instrument panel substrate (cover is mounted on housing body, see paragraph 0044).”
Regarding claim 20, Tanaka teaches “The vehicle of claim 11, wherein the electronic display is supported by at least three support brackets (display panel is mounted on fixing portion of housing unit, see paragraph 0026).”
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.
Claims 2-3 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (JP 2020138562 A), in view of Hejda et al. (US 20240337838 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka teaches all the limitations of the claims, as applied to claim 1 above, except “wherein the electronic display has a display curvature between opposite lateral ends.”
However, Hejda teaches “wherein the electronic display has a display curvature between opposite lateral ends (see Hejda, Figure 3).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the curved display screen as taught by Hejda, with the vehicle dashboard housing assembly as taught by Tanaka, to allow the screen to better conform to the contour of the car and facilitate a more natural viewing angle, with a reasonable expectation of success.
PNG
media_image7.png
436
493
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Hejda, Figure 3
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka in view of Hejda teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 2, wherein the electronic display is a panoramic display (see paragraph 0029).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the curved, panoramic display screen as taught by Hejda, with the vehicle dashboard housing assembly as taught by Tanaka, to allow the screen to better conform to the contour of the car and facilitate a more natural viewing angle, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 12, Tanaka teaches all the limitations of the claims, as applied to claim 11 above, except “the electronic display has a display curvature between opposite lateral ends.”
However, Hejda teaches “the electronic display has a display curvature between opposite lateral ends (see Hejda, Figure 3).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the curved display screen as taught by Hejda, with the vehicle comprising a dashboard housing assembly as taught by Tanaka, to allow the screen to better conform to the contour of the car and facilitate a more natural viewing angle, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 13, Tanaka in view of Hejda teaches “The vehicle display system of claim 12, wherein the electronic display is a panoramic display (see paragraph 0029).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the curved, panoramic display screen as taught by Hejda, with the vehicle comprising a dashboard housing assembly as taught by Tanaka, to allow the screen to better conform to the contour of the car and facilitate a more natural viewing angle, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following references disclose vehicle display mount assemblies.
Murthy et al. (US 20260084620 A1) discloses a display mount system for a truck.
Suda et al. (JP 2023177559 A) discloses a display mount system, but the display does not extend between the vehicle support pillars.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK R CATALANO whose telephone number is (571)270-0470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at (571) 272-5109. 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.
/JRC/
/JASON S MORROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights