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
1. Claims 6-8, 11, and 13-15 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claims 1, 3, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lushner et al., CN109189288 (translation).
Regarding claim 1, Lushner teaches of a display device comprising:
a first display panel comprising a plurality of first sub-pixels (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 which discloses of display on the dashboard consisting of display elements 104, 106, and 108 which consist of sub-pixels);
a first display driver circuit configured to control an image display operation of the first display panel (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 and 10-11 processor to control the display and operation of the display on the dashboard);
a second display panel disposed in front of the first display panel and comprising a plurality of second sub-pixels and a plurality of light-transmitting areas disposed adjacent to the plurality of second sub-pixels (See Fig.1, 110; Pages 7-8 tablet computer comprising sub pixels displayed on the screen of the tablet having at least light transmitting areas adjacent as it displays the content such that can seen through the tablet screen); and
a second display driver circuit configured to control an image display operation of the second display panel, wherein the second display panel is superimposed with the first display panel at a predetermined distance (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 and 10-11 which discloses of the processor for controller operation of the tablet and where the tablet screen is superimposing at least part of the dashboard display at a predetermined fixed distance from the steering wheel to the dashboard display. Further, it should be noted that the term superimpose includes and encompasses overlaying in an opaque manner).
Regarding claim 3, Lushner teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the first display panel is fixedly disposed at a location in a vehicle (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 dashboard display), and wherein the second display panel is disposed on a steering wheel disposed in front of the first display panel with a rotational position of the steering wheel (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 steering wheel tablet screen).
Regarding claim 16, Lushner teaches of a vehicle control system comprising: a first display panel including a first plurality of sub-pixels (See Fig.1, Pages 7-8); a first display driver circuit configured to control an operation of the first display panel (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 and 10-11); a second display panel rotatably disposed in front of the first display panel and including a second plurality of sub-pixels and light-transmitting areas (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 and 10-11 analysis of claim 1); and a second display driver circuit configured to control an operation of the second display panel (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 and 10-11;analysis of claim 1).
Regarding claim 17, Lushner teaches the vehicle control system of claim 16, wherein the first display panel is fixedly disposed in a vehicle (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 dashboard display), and wherein the second display panel is disposed on a steering wheel disposed in front of the first display panel with a rotational position of the steering wheel (See Fig.1; Pages 7-8 steering wheel tablet screen).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 2, 4-5, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushner et al., CN109189288 (translation) in view of Diboine et al., WO 20231371829 (translation).
Regarding claim 2, Lushner teaches of the display device of claim 1, wherein the first display panel is fixedly disposed at a location in a vehicle (See Pages 7-8; Fig.1), and wherein the second display panel is disposed in front of the first display panel to be superimposed with the first display panel at the predetermined distance (See analysis of claim 1; Pages 7-8; Fig.1).
Lushner is silent with respect to the second display panel on a dashboard.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Diboine teaches of the second display panel on a dashboard (See Figs. 2-3 and 13-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lushner to have incorporated the teachings of Diboine for the mere benefit of proving the second display in a different area of the vehicle for better visibility.
Regarding claim 4, Lushner teaches the display device of claim 3.
Lushner is silent with respect wherein the plurality of light-transmitting areas are transparent and transmit light therethrough.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Diboine teaches of wherein the plurality of light-transmitting areas are transparent and transmit light therethrough (See Pages 7-9 the displays may be implemented as HUD’s and be transparent).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lushner to have incorporated the teachings of Diboine for the mere benefit of being adaptable to different types of display types.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the display device of claim 3, wherein an image display unit of the second display panel comprises: a first pixel area comprising at least one sub-pixel of the plurality of second sub-pixels (See Lushner, Fig.1 pages 7-8; Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10); a second pixel area comprising at least one sub-pixel of the plurality of second sub-pixels different from the first pixel area (See Lushner, Fig.1 pages 7-8; Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10); and a light-transmitting area of the plurality of light-transmitting areas that is transparent and transmits light therethrough (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10).
Regarding claim 18, the combination teaches the vehicle control system of claim 17, further comprising: an input unit configured to sense a status of the vehicle (Diboine , Pages 6-10; Lushner, Pages 7-10); and a main controller electrically connected to the second display driver circuit and configured to control the second display driver circuit based on the status of the vehicle (See Lushner, Pages 7-10; Diboine; Fig.15 and Pages 6-10 displaying navigation and automated driving according to status and inputs).
6. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diboine et al., WO 20231371829 (translation) in view of Nagara, US 2015/0009189.
Regarding claim 9, Diboine teaches of a display device comprising:
a first display panel configured to display a first image or a second image through a plurality of first sub-pixels (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10);
a first display driver circuit configured to control an image display operation of the first display panel (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10);
a second display panel in which a plurality of second sub-pixels and a plurality of light-transmitting areas are alternately arranged to display the second image through the plurality of second sub-pixels (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10);
a second display driver circuit configured to control an image display operation of the second display panel (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10); and
a touch sensing unit formed on a front surface of the second display panel (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10), and the second display panel is superimposed with the first display panel at a predetermined distance in front of the first display panel (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10).
Diboine is silent with respect to wherein the plurality of light-transmitting areas of the second display panel is configured to transmit light emitted by the first display panel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nagara teaches of wherein the plurality of light-transmitting areas of the second display panel is configured to transmit light emitted by the first display panel (See [0008] and [0023]-[0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Diboine to have incorporated the teachings of Nagara for the mere benefit of being able to create a 3D image and enhance user experience.
7. Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diboine et al., WO 20231371829 (translation) in view of Nagara, US 2015/0009189, and in further view of Lushner et al., CN109189288 (translation).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Diboine and Nagara teach the display device of claim 9, wherein the first display panel is fixedly disposed at a location in a vehicle (See Diboine, Fig.15 and Pages 7-10).
Diboine is silent with respect to wherein the second display panel is fastened to a steering wheel by at least one fastening member and disposed in front of the first display panel with a rotational position of the steering wheel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lushner teaches of wherein the second display panel is fastened to a steering wheel by at least one fastening member and disposed in front of the first display panel with a rotational position of the steering wheel
(See Lushner, Fig.1, Pages 7-8 tablet attached to steering wheel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Diboine and Nagara to have incorporated the teachings of Lushner for mere benefit of improved flexibility with regards to location of the displays.
Regarding claim 12, the combination teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein an image display unit of the second display panel comprises: a first pixel area comprising at least one sub-pixel of the plurality of second sub-pixels pixels (See Lushner, Fig.1 pages 7-8; Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10); a second pixel area comprising at least one sub-pixel the plurality of second sub-pixels different from the first pixel area pixels (See Lushner, Fig.1 pages 7-8; Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10); and a light-transmitting area of the plurality of light-transmitting areas that is transparent and transmits light therethrough pixels (See Diboine, Fig.15 pages 7-10).
8. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushner et al., CN109189288 (translation) in view of Diboine et al., WO 20231371829 (translation), and in further view of Ojima et al., US 12,304,580.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Lushner and Diboine teaches the vehicle control system of claim 18.
The combination is silent with respect to wherein the input unit further comprises a steering input part configured to output a rotational position of the steering wheel to the main controller.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ojima teaches of wherein the input unit further comprises a steering input part configured to output a rotational position of the steering wheel to the main controller (See Figs. 2A;2B;7 and col.2-col.7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lushner and Diboine to have incorporated the teachings of Ojima for the mere benefit of better guiding and instructing the driver.
9. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushner et al., CN109189288 (translation) in view of Diboine et al., WO 20231371829 (translation), and in further view of Nagara, US 2014/0368425.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Lushner and Diboine teaches the vehicle control system of claim 18. The combination further teaches of the input unit further comprises a camera input part configured to output to the main controller (See Lushner, Pages 6-9 camera for gesture and identity).
The combination is silent with respect to the camera inputting a gaze of a user.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nagara teaches of the camera inputting a gaze of a user (See [0034] and [0038] users eyes moving to new location).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lushner and Diboine to have incorporated the teachings of Nagara for the mere benefit of being able to adjust display based on the users eyes.
Contact
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ricky Chin whose telephone number is 571-270-3753. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached on 571-272-3982. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Ricky Chin/
Primary Examiner
AU 2424
(571) 270-3753
Ricky.Chin@uspto.gov