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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to independent claim 1, Applicant argues Huang (US 20170053444) does not disclose each and every feature of the claim. Applicant argues Huang makes no distinction between all detected driving information, such as vehicle speed, and environment information, such as position and distance of an obstacle, and does not teach the newly amended features of the claim. Therefore, Applicant concludes Huang does not teach each and every feature of the claim and the claim 1 is patentably distinguished from the reference.
However, the claim does not appear to require or suggest making any sort of distinction between detected driving information or environment information, or event detecting any sort of speed, position, or distance of an obstacle, and instead only broadly recites a sensor to detect at least one object in surrounding of the vehicle, where a light element is assigned to the object, and selectively activated to mark the object as relevant to the current situation. As such, the claim is not required to make any such distinction. If the Applicant firmly believes such features to be fundamental to their application, the Examiner strongly encourages them to actually amend the claims to recite such features, rather than arguing for features the claims simply do not reflect. Further, Huang teaches presenting warning icons based on position of objects in the environment by activating light elements according to the situation of the vehicle, where at least relevant pedestrians are highlighted and a front vehicle is highlighted depending on the driving situation. In situations where these objects do not exist or are sufficiently far away to not be analyzed, they are not relevant and not highlighted.
As such, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant argues the same arguments of claim 1 apply to claim 6.
This argument is unpersuasive for the same reasons as given above.
Applicant argues the dependent claims are patentably distinct by virtue of their dependency.
This argument is unpersuasive as each independent and dependent claim has been fully rejected and for the same reasons as given above.
Applicant argues the remaining references do not remedy the deficiencies of the rejections of the independent claims.
However, none of the remaining references are required to remedy any challenged limitation of the independent claims and therefore this argument is unpersuasive.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 20170053444).
In regards to claim 1, Huang teaches a display system for at least one pane of a window of an interior of a vehicle, the display system comprising: (Fig 1, 2, 5.)
light elements arrangeable on the at least one pane, ([0024], [0025] display panel contains light emitting diode, AMOLED, panel made of transparent material on any window of the vehicle.)
at least one control device, ([0028] processing unit at least controls display and serves as control device.) and
at least one sensor to detect at least one object in surroundings of the vehicle, ([0027] vehicle dynamic detection unit detects environmental information around vehicle including position and distance of obstacles using sensors of the vehicle.)
wherein the at least one control device is designed to activate at least one light element, among the light elements which are arranged on the at least one pane, which from a perspective of an observer from the interior of the vehicle through the at least one pane, is assigned to the at least one object that is detected in the surroundings, ([0024], [0025], [0028], [0038], [0039] processing unit controls display based on sensed environmental information to present a warning based upon detected objects including other vehicles and pedestrians, particularly such that the driver may simultaneously view the displayed information and the actual scene on the other side of the window. This particularly activates light elements of the display to show a warning image assigned to an object on the display based on the perspective view of the driver.)
wherein the at least one light element activated is designed to mark the at least one object as relevant to a current driving situation of the vehicle among multiple objects being detectable by the at least one sensor. ([0024], [0025], [0039] warning icons may be presented according to position of an object in the environment, which activates light elements of AMOLED display panel. This, for example, highlights a pedestrian when they are relevant to the driving situation and highlights a front vehicle when relevant to the driving situation.)
In regards to claim 3, Huang teaches the display system according to claim 1, wherein the light elements are designed as light-emitting diodes. ([0024], [0025] display panel contains light emitting diode, AMOLED, panel made of transparent material on any window of the vehicle.)
In regards to claim 5, Huang teaches the display system according claim 1, wherein the at least one pane of the vehicle is designed as a windshield. ([0024], [0025] display panel contains light emitting diode, AMOLED, panel made of transparent material on a windshield of the vehicle.)
In regards to claim 6, Huang teaches a method of operating a display system for at least one pane of a window of an interior of a vehicle, the display system comprising: (Fig 3.)
light elements, arrangeable on the at least one pane, ([0024], [0025] display panel contains light emitting diode, AMOLED, panel made of transparent material on any window of the vehicle.)
at least one control device, ([0028] processing unit at least controls display and serves as control device.) and
at least one sensor to detect at least one object in surroundings of the vehicle, ([0027] vehicle dynamic detection unit detects environmental information around vehicle including position and distance of obstacles using sensors of the vehicle.)
wherein at least one light element, among the light elements which are arranged on the at least one pane, which from a perspective from the interior of the vehicle through the at least one pane, is assigned to the at least one object that is detected in the surroundings, ([0024], [0025], [0028], [0038], [0039] processing unit controls display based on sensed environmental information to present a warning based upon detected objects including other vehicles and pedestrians, particularly such that the driver may simultaneously view the displayed information and the actual scene on the other side of the window. This particularly activates light elements of the display to show a warning image assigned to an object on the display based on the perspective view of the driver.)
wherein the at least one light element is activated by the at least one control device, and the at least one object is marked by the at least one light element activated, as relevant to a current driving situation of the vehicle among multiple objects being detectable by the at least one sensor. ([0024], [0025], [0039] warning icons may be presented according to position of an object in the environment, which activates light elements of AMOLED display panel. [0028] operations performed by processing unit, including display activation. This, for example, highlights a pedestrian when they are relevant to the driving situation and highlights a front vehicle when relevant to the driving situation.)
In regards to claim 8, Huang teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein at least a vehicle, a pedestrian, and/or a road sign, is marked as the at least one object using at least one color. ([0039] warning icon is presented on display for pedestrian. [0024] display is composed at least in part of AMOLED panel made of transparent material which displays information using lighting, this displayed information necessarily has at least one color to be visible to the human eye as described within the disclosure of the reference.)
In regards to claim 9, Huang teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein a symbol, which is assigned to the at least one object, is generated by the at least one light element. ([0024], [0039] warning icon is presented on display to indicate a pedestrian, which is done by operating AMOLED display panel elements.)
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, in view of Thompson et al. (US 20160154170).
In regards to claim 2, Huang teaches the display system according to claim 1.
Huang does not teach: wherein the light elements are arranged in at least one strip on the at least one pane.
However, Thompson teaches a transparent flexible LED light sheet that is used in strips to form a heads up display for a vehicle ([0331]-[0333]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle display system of Huang, by incorporating the teachings of Thompson, such that the display panel of Huang is applied in strops of AMOLED elements.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Thompson, this allows for displaying more pertinent information to the driver of the vehicle ([0333]).
Claim 4, 7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, in view of Kalinichenko (US 20250207929).
In regards to claim 4, Huang teaches the display system according to claim 1.
Huang also teaches warning icons may be presented according to position of an object in the environment, which activates light elements of AMOLED display panel ([0024], [0025], [0039]).
Huang does not teach:
wherein the at least one control device exchanges data with at least one driver assistance system of the vehicle,
wherein the at least one driver assistance system is designed to assist a driver of the vehicle and to determine the at least one object to be marked from the multiple objects in the surroundings.
However, Kalinichenko teaches a driver assistance system that communicates with a display to present relevant images highlighting identified objects and highlights the objects within images ([0018], [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle display system of Huang, by incorporating the teachings of Kalinichenko, such that a driver assistance system is incorporated within the vehicle of Huang which communicates with the window display to selectively display images highlighting identified obstacles with the warning icons of Huang.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Kalinichenko, this allows for improving driver comfort while reducing the risk of accidents ([0003], [0004]).
In regards to claim 7, Huang teaches the method according to claim 6.
Huang also teaches warning icons may be presented according to position of an object in the environment, which activates light elements of AMOLED display panel ([0024], [0025], [0039]).
Huang does not teach:
in which it is checked by at least one driver assistance system which at least one object in the surroundings is relevant for a journey of the vehicle, wherein this at least one object is marked by the at least one light element.
However, Kalinichenko teaches a driver assistance system that communicates with a display to present relevant images highlighting identified objects and highlights the objects within images ([0018], [0025]), where images are searched particularly based on prompts from a user either filtering to a region or to a type of object such as building or vehicle ([0019]-[0021]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle display method of Huang, by incorporating the teachings of Kalinichenko, such that a driver assistance system is incorporated within the vehicle of Huang which communicates with the window display to selectively display images highlighting identified obstacles with the warning icons of Huang, where only relevant objects are highlighted based on user prompting.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Kilinchenko in regards to claim 4.
In regards to claim 10, Huang teaches the method according to claim 6.
Huang does not teach:
wherein at least one line of sight to the at least one object in the surroundings is determined from a head of an observer in the interior of the vehicle,
wherein at least one intersection point of the at least one line of sight with the at least one pane is determined, wherein the at least one light element is activated on the at least one intersection point.
However, Kalinichenko teaches determining eye gaze for an occupant of a vehicle and updating a display to show further information at the position the occupant is looking based on an object the occupant is looking at, where objects are identified based on user input including eye gaze, and identified objects are highlighted, where the occupant’s gaze is determined by monitoring the occupant, which includes their head ([0018]-[0021], [0023], [0025]). This identifies an object an occupant is looking at based on their gaze, and then highlights the object the occupant is looking at, which is at the intersection of the occupant’s gaze and the display.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle display method of Huang, by incorporating the teachings of Kalinichenko, such that a user’s gaze is tracked to determine an object the user is viewing and when prompted, the object is highlighted on the window display of Huang, which is at the intersection of the driver’s gaze with the window pane.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Kalinichenko in regards to claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rhee et al. (US 20250196642) teaches a vehicle window mounted transparent display made of OLEDs.
Murancsik et al. (US 20210063738) teaches indicating objects using a vehicle windshield display by adjusting transparency.
Candelore (US 20170240047) teaches a transparent OLED vehicle window display.
Fong et al. (US 20140002252) teaches a row of point light sources to form a vehicle windshield display.
Seder et al. (US 8514099) teaches a vehicle window mounted display composed of light emitting elements to selectively illuminate based on a viewer’s gaze.
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 MATTHIAS S WEISFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-7258. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Ramya Burgess can be reached at Ramya.Burgess@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/MATTHIAS S WEISFELD/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights