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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of information disclosure statement(s) filed 24 March 2026.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant arguments/Remarks made in amendment in which the following is noted: claims 1, 4, and 7 are amended; the rejection of the claims traversed; and claim 5 – 6 and 8 remain withdrawn. Claims 1 – 4 and 7 are currently pending and an Office action on the merits follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 4 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues Lashkar does not disclose the estimator configured to estimate positions of faces of plurality of persons in a cabin of a vehicle and the definer configured to display the display size of the image depending on a distance between an average of the positions of the faces, as claimed.
The Office respectfully submits said limitation is obvious in view of Shows for those reasons discussed in the rejection of the claims below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laskar et al; (Patent number: US 9, 704, 216 B1), hereafter Laskar, in view of Shows et al; (Patent number: US 8, 643, 700 B2), hereafter Shows.
Regarding claim 1: A control apparatus (Laskar Figure adjustment module 400), comprising:
an estimator (Laskar Figure 4 430 is functional equivalent of claimed estimator; Col 10 lines 51 – 67 The distance module 430 can be configured to determine a user's facial proximity to a display screen of an electronic device using one or more facial proximity sensors selected from any number of cameras, infrared sensors, radio sensors, and ultrasound sensors. For example, the mobile computing device 200A of FIG. 2A includes at least one camera 250A that can be used as a facial proximity sensor. To determine the user's facial proximity to the display screen of the electronic device, the distance module 430 can be configured to first determine distance data from facial proximity-sensor data provided by the one or more facial proximity sensors. Continuing with the camera example (e.g., the camera 250A of the mobile computing device 200A of FIG. 2A) of a facial proximity sensor, the distance module 430 can thus be configured to first determine distance data from one or images provided by the camera. The distance data can be determined (e.g., by trigonometric calculation) using a known inter-eye distance from the vision record 415 and a measured inter-eye distance from the one or more images. With the known distance data, the distance module 430 can be configured to subsequently determine the user's facial proximity, which can correspond directly to the distance data or be a derivative form thereof (e.g., a facial proximity factor) useful for one or more other modules) configured to estimate a position of a face of a person in a cabin of a vehicle (Laskar Col 5 lines 52 – 57; While FIGS. 1A and 1B are directed to a mobile computing device, it should be understood that systems provided herein also include electronic devices such as personal computers, televisions such as television 105, smart electronic systems on bicycles (“smart bicycles”), and smart electronic systems on automobiles (“smart automobiles”).;
an obtainer (Laskar Figure 4 440 functional equivalent of obtainer obtains magnitude and direction i.e., vector for adjustment) configured to obtain a position of an image displayed by ta display apparatus that is installed in the vehicle and displays the image (Laskar Col 12 line 23 – Col 12 line 43.The display modification module 440 can be configured to determine a direction and a magnitude for adjusting the rendered information on the display screen to a new size on the basis of the user's facial proximity to the display screen and the user's visual acuity as provided by the distance module 430 and the vision properties module 410, respectively. A compositor can be configured to cooperate with the display modification module 440 to scale the rendered information in accordance with the direction and the magnitude determined by the display modification module 440 … As such, the display modification module 440 would cooperate with the display interface 890 of FIG. 8 to adjust the rendered information in an adjustment in that direction. The magnitude of the adjustment would be in accordance with the user's visual acuity per the vision properties module 410.); and
a definer (Laskar Figure 4 440 functional equivalent of definer) configured to define a display a display size of the image depending on a distance between the position of the face and the position of the image (Laskar Col 12 line 23 – Col 12 line 33. The display modification module 440 can be configured to determine a direction and a magnitude for adjusting the rendered information on the display screen to a new size on the basis of the user's facial proximity to the display screen and the user's visual acuity as provided by the distance module 430 and the vision properties module 410, respectively. A compositor can be configured to cooperate with the display modification module 440 to scale the rendered information in accordance with the direction and the magnitude determined by the display modification module 440.).
Lakshar differs in that the estimator is configured to estimate positions of faces of plurality of persons and the definer defining the display size according to a distance between an average of the positions of the faces.
However, Shows discloses 3D content adjustment system. More particularly, Shows discloses estimating positions of faces of a plurality of persons (Shows Col 4 lines 47 – 55; The camera 116 is operable to detect each of the viewers 302a, 302b, 302c, 302d, and 302e in its visible field using, for example, facial recognition technology and/or other object detection technologies known in the art. In an embodiment, for each viewer detected, the camera 116 is operable to determine a viewer distance. In an embodiment, the viewer distance for each viewer may be the distance from the camera 116 to the viewers face, eyes, or other point or points on the viewers face or body.) and modifying an original image for display based on the viewer information (Shows Figure 3a 306; The method 300 then proceeds to block 306 where the original stereoscopic images are modified. In an embodiment, the parameter application engine 206 receives the average or averages of the viewer information from the viewing parameter determination engine 204 and the 3D content from the content receiving engine 208, and uses the average or averages of the viewer information to modify the 3D content. For example, the parameter application engine 206 may use the average viewer distance and average viewer interocular measurement to modify the original stereoscopic images to create modified stereoscopic images.; Col 7 lines 6 - 17).
It would have been obvious to modify Lakshar to include an estimator configured to estimate positions of faces of plurality of persons in a cabin of a vehicle; and a definer configured to define a display size of the image depending on a distance between an average of the positions of the faces and the position of the image, as claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate optimizing viewing comfort for more than one user.
Regarding claim 2:
Laskar (in view of Shows) discloses the control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the definer reduces the display size as the distance is shorter (Laskar Figure 1C; Col 5 line 52 – Col 6 line 21. While FIGS. 1A and 1B are directed to a mobile computing device, it should be understood that systems provided herein also include electronic devices such as personal computers, televisions such as television 105, smart electronic systems on bicycles (“smart bicycles”), and smart electronic systems on automobiles (“smart automobiles”). As shown in FIGS. 1C and 1D, a user 199 can likewise view rendered information such as rendered text and any UI elements on a display screen of the television 105 from a distance a (e.g., length of a fully extended arm), a distance b (e.g., recommended viewing distance in accordance with a size of the television 105), or some distance between distances a and b. Beginning with FIG. 1C, should the user be more comfortable viewing or more clearly see the rendered text and UI elements at a farther distance from the display screen, the user can move from the distance a to the distance b as shown in FIG. 1D to increase the size of the rendered information. Turning to FIG. 1D, should the user instead be more comfortable viewing or more clearly see the rendered text and UI elements at a closer distance to the display screen, the user can move from the distance b to the distance a as shown in FIG. 1C to decrease the size of the rendered information. In accordance with systems and methods provided herein, moving from the distance a to the distance b invokes a rendered information-adjustment module that dynamically resizes, and, thereby, re-renders the originally rendered information on the display screen such that the re-rendered information is larger than the originally rendered information. Likewise, moving from the distance b to the distance a invokes the rendered information-adjustment module that dynamically resizes, and, thereby, re-renders the originally rendered information on the display screen such that the re-rendered information is smaller than the originally rendered information. Additionally or alternatively, the systems and methods provided herein are configured to account for a myopic user of the mobile computing device.)
Regarding claim 3:
Laskar (in view of Shows) discloses the control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the position of the image is at a center of the image (Laskar see Figures 1C and 1D illustrating position of text being center of the image).
Regarding claim 4:
Laskar (in view of Shows) discloses the control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the estimator estimates the orientations of the faces (Laskar Figure 5 – 6B; Shows (Shows Col 4 lines 47 – 55), and the definer defines a display position of the image depending on the orientation of the face (Laskar Col 11 lines 29 – 57. While the distance data can be determined (e.g., by trigonometric calculation) using a known inter-eye distance from the vision record 415 and a measured inter-eye distance from the one or more images, the measured inter-eye distance from the one or more images can be affected by the user's head motions such as head pitch, head roll, and head yaw, which head motions are illustrated in FIG. 5 for user 599. Of the foregoing head motions, it should be appreciated that head yaw can have the greatest effect on the measured inter-eye distance from the one or more images. As shown in FIG. 6A, user 699A (or a schematic representation of eyes of the user 699A) can face the display without any appreciable head yaw, and the measured inter-eye distance without head yaw can be measured as d.sub.m. However, as shown in FIG. 6B, user 699B (or a schematic representation of eyes of the user 699B) can obliquely face the display with a certain degree of head yaw, and the measured inter-eye distance with head yaw can be measured as d.sub.m′. In the event that the user 699A and the user 699B are the same user, the measured inter-eye distance with head yaw d.sub.m′ can be less than the measured inter-eye distance without head yaw d.sub.m. To account for the discrepancy in the measured inter-eye distances d.sub.m and d.sub.m′, other factors can be taken into consideration to account for the user's head yaw for accordingly adjusting (e.g., averaging) the measured inter-eye distance for dynamically resizing rendered information on the display screen. Other factors can include, for example, lighting changes on the user's face or a length of the user's nose, which can indicate the degree of head yaw.)
Regarding claim 7:
Claim 7 is similarly rejected for those reasons discusses above in claim 1 (and for those further reasons disclosed by Laskar Col 19 line 27 – 50. Computing system 800 typically includes a variety of computing machine-readable media. Computing machine-readable media can be any available media that can be accessed by computing system 800 and includes both volatile and nonvolatile media, and removable and non-removable media. By way of example, and not limitation, computing machine-readable media use includes storage of information, such as computer-readable instructions, data structures, other executable software or other data. Computer-storage media includes, but is not limited to, RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memory technology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical disk storage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other tangible medium which can be used to store the desired information and which can be accessed by the computing device 800. Transitory media such as wireless channels are not included in the machine-readable media. Communication media typically embody computer readable instructions, data structures, other executable software, or other transport mechanism and includes any information delivery media. As an example, some client computing systems on the network 220 of FIG. 7 might not have optical or magnetic storage.).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIHIR K RAYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 - 5pm (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7063. 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.
/MIHIR K RAYAN/ 3 April 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622