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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “The electronic device as claimed in claim ,” in line 1, comprises a typo. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mondragon et al. (US 2013/0063340) in view of Ragland (US 2013/0083976).
Regarding claim 1, Mondragon discloses an electronic device (smart video display unit SVDU 100, figs. 1-2), comprising a display screen (220), a host (200), an image collection device (102) and a light source (110), wherein the image collection device (102, fig. 1) is disposed in the host (such as body of the SVDU 100 which comprises host processor 200), the light source (110, fig. 9), on the host, the image collection device (102) is configured to collect an image of an eye (120, fig. 1) of a user using the electronic device (100), and the image of the eye comprises a facula formed by the light source (110) (paras. 0026-0027 and 0030).
Mondragon does not specifically disclose a light-transmitting area are disposed on the host; the light-transmitting area is overlapped with a projection of a collection range of the image collection device.
In a similar field of endeavor of an electronic device, Ragland disclose a light-transmitting area (12) are disposed on the host (35); the light-transmitting area (12) is overlapped with a projection of a collection range of an image collection device (11) (paras. 0038-0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the light-transmitting area as taught by Ragland in the system of Mondragon in order to effectively control light intensities allowed by the system (para. 0042).
Regarding claim 2, Mondragon discloses a number of the light source (110-1 to 110-n) is at least two, two sides of the image collection device (102) are provided with at least one light source, and a light-emitting center of the light source and a focus of a lens of the image collection device are disposed on a same straight line (fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Mondragon and Ragland discloses the electronic device comprises a transparent cover plate (14, fig. 4A of Ragland), wherein the transparent cover plate is disposed on the light-transmitting area (para. 0038).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Mondragon and Ragland discloses the image collection device and the host are fixedly mounted at a set angle (para. 0032 of Ragland).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Mondragon and Ragland discloses the image collection device (such as 1910, fig. 17 of Ragland) is disposed towards a plane where a keyboard area (such as virtual keyboard on display 1903) on the host (1900) is located, and the image collection device (1910) directly collects the image of the eye through the light-transmitting area (not shown on the camera 1910) (para. 0113).
Regarding claim 6, Mondragon discloses the electronic device comprises a reflection apparatus (such as reflected lens, para. 0030), wherein the reflection apparatus is disposed in the host, the image collection device faces the reflection apparatus, and the reflection apparatus is disposed to reflect light rays reflected by the eye of the user (paras. 0030 and 0036).
Regarding claim 7, Mondragon discloses the reflection apparatus comprises one or more of the following: a mirror face, a prism and a dichroic mirror (paras. 0030 and 0036).
Regarding claim 8, Mondragon discloses the image collection device (102) is movably mounted in the host (paras. 0064-0065).
Regarding claim 9, Mondragon discloses a motor (220), which is disposed in the host, wherein the motor is connected with the image collection device (102), and the motor is disposed to adjust the collection range of the image collection device (paras. 0064-0065).
Regarding claim 10, Mondragon discloses a device angle measuring apparatus, which is connected with the image collection device (para. 0036),
wherein the device angle measuring apparatus is disposed to collect a device angle parameter of the image collection device, and the device angle measuring apparatus is further disposed to transmit the device angle parameter to a processor, so that the processor carries out calibration point correction based on the device angle parameter (para. 0036).
Regarding claim 11, Mondragon discloses an elevation angle of the image collection device is determined based on one or more of the following:
head location of the user; and an adjusting parameter of the display screen, and the adjusting parameter is determined based on a current screen angle parameter of the display screen (paras. 0064-0065).
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mondragon et al. in view of Ragland and further in view of Delaporte (US 2022/0197341).
Regarding claims 12-20, the combination of Mondragon Ragland does not disclose “the electronic device comprises a second rotating shaft …based on the screen angle parameter”.
In a similar field of endeavor of electronic device, Delaporte discloses the electronic device (11, figs. 1-2) comprises a second rotating shaft (31) and a screen angle measuring apparatus (57), one end of the display screen (17) is connected with one end of the host (19) through the second rotating shaft, the screen angle measuring apparatus is disposed in the second rotating shaft, the screen angle measuring apparatus is disposed to measure a screen angle parameter of the display screen and transmit the screen angle parameter to a processor, so that the processor carries out calibration point correction based on the screen angle parameter (paras. 0012-0013).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the second rotating shaft and screen angle measuring apparatus as taught by Delaporte in the system of Mondragon and Ragland in order allow user to have flexibility to move into different position (para. 0012).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Wu et al. (US 2020/0050263) disclose calculating a position where the user gazes on the screen according to the head posture angle, the rotation reference angles, and the predetermined calibration positions; and configuring the screen to display a corresponding visual effect according to the gaze position (para. 0006).
Ebisawa (US 2013/0188834) discloses detect a gaze point on a predetermined plane according to the directions of lines of sight (fig. 4, para. 0011).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7696. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-5:00.
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, Benjamin C Lee can be reached at 5712722963. 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.
/JENNIFER T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights