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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 2/11/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 9, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6 and 18 recite the limitation "the moveable mirror head assembly" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant should amend this limitation to just “the head assembly”.
The remaining dependent claims are rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10, 13-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 7,448,392 to Straehle et al. (Straehle).
PNG
media_image1.png
454
465
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
311
468
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
330
465
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1: Straehle discloses a rearview device for a vehicle, comprising: a base frame (See Annotated Fig. A) configured to be fixedly attached to the vehicle; a head assembly (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base frame (See Annotated Fig. A) and configured to move relative to the base frame to adjust a field of view of the rearview device; a camera unit (See Annotated Fig. A) fixedly attached to the base frame such that the camera unit does not move with the head assembly (See Annotated Fig. A);a base cover (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base frame; and a base cap (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base cover to surround a lens of the camera unit and provide an opening through which the camera unit can obtain an image.
Regarding Claim 2: Straehle discloses a rearview device of claim 1, wherein the camera unit is fixed on the base frame with a camera connector (See Annotated Fig. A).
Regarding Claims 3 and 16: Straehle discloses a rearview device wherein the head assembly (See Annotated Fig. A) includes an upper casing element (See Annotated Fig. A), a lower casing element (See Annotated Fig. A), and a bezel (See Annotated Fig. A) that carries a mirror glass.
Regarding Claims 10 and 20: Straehle discloses a rearview device wherein the camera unit is positioned to produce images of . . . a side of the vehicle--.
Regarding Claim 13: Straehle discloses an external rearview system for a vehicle, comprising: a base assembly (See Annotated Fig. A) that includes a base frame (See Annotated Fig. A) and a base cover (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base frame, wherein the base frame is configured to be fixedly attached to the vehicle; a head assembly (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base frame and configured to move relative to the base frame to adjust a field of view of the rearview device; a camera unit (See Annotated Fig. A) fixedly attached to the base frame such that the camera unit does not move with the head assembly; and a base cap (See Annotated Fig. A) attached to the base cover to surround a lens of the camera unit and provide an opening through which the camera unit can obtain an image, wherein the base cap includes one or more extensions (See Annotated Fig. A and Fig. C) that engage with the camera unit to retain the camera unit in position within the opening of the base cap.
Regarding Claim 14: Straehle discloses an external rearview system of claim 13, wherein the base cover includes one or more extension portions (See Annotated Fig. A) protruding from a lower surface of the base cover for supporting and retaining the base cap in position.
Regarding Claim 15: Straehle discloses an external rearview system of claim 13, wherein the camera unit is fixed on the base frame with a camera connector (See Annotated Fig. C).
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.
Claim(s) 4-9, 11 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Straehle in view of US Patent App. No. 2011/0194203 to Foote et al. (Foote).
Regarding Claims 4 and 17: Straehle does not disclose an actuator assembly. However, Foote teaches an actuator assembly (18, 118) attached to the base frame (16, 116) and configured to move the head assembly (14, 114) connected to the actuator assembly. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Straehle by using an actuator assembly similar to that taught by Foote to enable the head to move with respect to the base frame using a motor to help the user by not requiring the user to physically move the head assembly.
Regarding Claim 5: Straehle discloses a rearview device of claim 4, wherein the actuator assembly is configured to adjust the head assembly inwardly or outwardly and upwardly or downwardly (See para. 0016, lines 17-23) so that movement of the head assembly may be controlled using the actuator assembly to change the field of the rearview device.
Regarding Claims 6 and 18: Straehle discloses a rearview device wherein the moveable mirror head assembly is connected to the actuator assembly via a motor cradle (114a and 116a).
Regarding Claim 7: Straehle discloses a rearview device of claim 5, wherein the actuator assembly is further configured to adjust the head assembly between at least an outboard drive position, a standard drive position, and a park position. (See paragraphs 0020 and 0025)
Regarding Claim 8: Straehle discloses a rearview device of claim 7, wherein the actuator assembly is further configured to adjust the head assembly to one or more positions between the park position and the outboard drive position and/or standard drive position. (See paragraphs 0020 and 0025)
Regarding Claims 9 and 19: Straehle discloses a rearview device wherein the motor cradle includes an upper cradle (114a) connected to an upper casing element and a lower cradle (116a) connected to a lower casing element.
Regarding Claim 11: Straehle discloses a rearview device of claim 4, wherein the actuator assembly provides a range of angular motion of the head assembly that is greater in an inwardly or outwardly direction than in an upwardly or downwardly direction. This is implicitly taught because of the number of teeth (30b) shown on the inwardly and outwardly direction compared to the number of teeth (30a) on the upwardly and downwardly direction (See Figure 3).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Straehle in view of Foote and in further view of US Patent No. 4,727,302 to Mizuta et al. (Mizuta).
Regarding Claim 12: Neither Straehle nor Foote disclose or teach wherein programmable actuator assembly settings for one or more of the field of view in the drive position or the park position of the head assembly are pre- set for selection by a user of the rearview device. However, Mizuta teaches wherein programmable actuator assembly (4) settings (3) for one or more of the field of view in the drive position or the park position of the head assembly are pre- set for selection by a user of the rearview device. (See Figures 1 and 7 along with the associated description thereof.) It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Straehle in view of Foote by using a programmable actuator assembly similar to that taught by Mizuta to enable a user to save selected mirrors for a later use.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the references used in this rejection and those cited in the PTO-892, the following references are very relevant to the claimed invention: US 2007/0285939, WO2006/045869.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERET C MCNICHOLS whose telephone number is (571)270-7363. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00 - 5:00 (Eastern).
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
ERET C. MCNICHOLS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/ERET C MCNICHOLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights