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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is made in response to applicant’s amendment submitted on 02/12/2026. Claims 1-9 have been amended. No claim has been cancelled. Claims 10-11 have been newly added. Claims 1-11 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims and added limitations have been considered but are moot because the arguments are believed to be answered by and therefore moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection presented below. In view of amendment, the reference Hato has been used for new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hato et al. (US. Pub. No. 2019/0333481, hereinafter “Hato”).
As to claims 1, 8 and 9, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses a display control device [figure 1, display control block 35] for performing control to display states of a vicinity of a vehicle at a display device [figure 1, HUD device 20 provided in a cabin of the vehicle and is viewable by a driver] that is provided in a cabin of the vehicle and is viewable by a driver, associated with its display control method and its non-transitory computer-readable storage medium [figure 2, RAM 13, Memory 14] storing a display control program, the display control device comprising a processor configured to:
acquire, from an autonomous driving electronic control unit, an operation state of each of a plurality of driving assistance functions [paragraph 39, Each configuration of the peripheral monitoring sensor group 65 sequentially outputs detection information of the moving objects and the stationary objects to the autonomous driving ECU 50. In addition, the peripheral monitoring sensor group 65 may also detect information relating to the bumpy road surface in the traveling direction such as a highway joint, and output the result to the autonomous driving ECU 50, paragraph 40, The GNSS receiver 66 sequentially outputs the measured position information of the vehicle A to the autonomous driving ECU 50, paragraph 41, The autonomous driving ECU 50 acquires map data of the surroundings and the traveling direction of the vehicle A from the map DB 67 based on the position information measured by the GNSS receiver 66]; and
determine a display mode of a state of the vicinity of the vehicle based on a change in the acquired operation state of each of the plurality of driving assistance functions such that the display mode changes the change in the acquired each of the plurality of driving assistance functions [figure 6, determine a display mode of a state of the vicinity of the vehicle 42b (wide or narrow) based on a change in the acquired operation state (roughness of the road) which is acquired by the sensors of the plurality of driving assistance functions, paragraph 62, when the HUD device 20 is displaying the ACC target 42b (see FIG. 6) indicating the target vehicle to be followed, the width of the ACC target 42b displayed in a belt shape is narrowed based on the rough road determination. As described above, the ACC target 42b whose emission area is narrowed has a display mode that is darker than in the normal state. In addition, due to the decrease in the width, a clearance for allowing positional deviation is secured between the actual follow-up vehicle and the ACC target 42b, in view of the visual appearance of the driver. As described above, since the ACC target 42b is displayed in an ambiguous display mode, the positional deviation caused by the change in the vehicle attitude is hardly perceived by the driver.].
As to claim 2, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 1, wherein the state of the vicinity of the vehicle whose display mode is caused to change .
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.
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) 3, 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hato in view of Heilbron et al. (US. Pub. No. 2023/0236037, hereinafter “Heilbron”).
As to claim 3, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 2, wherein the processor is further configured to cause change of the vehicle 42b (wide or narrow) based on a change in the acquired operation state (roughness of the road) which is acquired by the sensors of the plurality of driving assistance functions, paragraph 62, when the HUD device 20 is displaying the ACC target 42b (see FIG. 6) indicating the target vehicle to be followed, the width of the ACC target 42b displayed in a belt shape is narrowed based on the rough road determination. As described above, the ACC target 42b whose emission area is narrowed has a display mode that is darker than in the normal state. In addition, due to the decrease in the width, a clearance for allowing positional deviation is secured between the actual follow-up vehicle and the ACC target 42b, in view of the visual appearance of the driver. As described above, since the ACC target 42b is displayed in an ambiguous display mode, the positional deviation caused by the change in the vehicle attitude is hardly perceived by the driver].
Hato does not disclose to maintain an inter-vehicle distance between the vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle.
Heilbron teaches to maintain an inter-vehicle distance between a vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle [paragraph 360, to maintain a safe distance between two vehicles traveling in the same direction].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to maintain an inter-vehicle distance between the vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle, as taught by Heilbron, in order to avoid a collision (Heilbron, paragraph 360).
As to claim 6, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 2.
Hato does not disclose wherein the display mode of the image of the boundary line is caused to change a middle of the traffic lane.
Heilbron teaches wherein a display mode of an image of the boundary line is caused to change in accordance with an operation state of a lane centering assist function that assists the vehicle to run along a middle of the traffic lane [figures 24A-F, display mode of an image of the boundary line is to differ in accordance with an operation state of a lane centering assist function that assists the vehicle to run along the middle of the traffic lane, paragraph 329, a series of points that may represent a centerline of a given lane mark. For example, continuous lane 2410 may be represented by centerline points 2441 along a centerline 2440 of the lane mark. In some embodiments, vehicle 200 may be configured to detect these center points using various image recognition techniques, such as convolutional neural networks (CNN), scale-invariant feature transform (SIFT), histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) features, or other techniques. Alternatively, vehicle 200 may detect other points, such as edge points 2411 shown in FIG. 24A, and may calculate centerline points 2441, for example, by detecting points along each edge and determining a midpoint between the edge points. Similarly, dashed lane mark 2420 may be represented by centerline points 2451 along a centerline 2450 of the lane mark. The centerline points may be located at the edge of a dash, as shown in FIG. 24C, or at various other locations along the centerline. For example, each dash may be represented by a single point in the geometric center of the dash. The points may also be spaced at a predetermined interval along the centerline (e.g., every meter, 5 meters, 10 meters, etc.). The centerline points 2451 may be detected directly by vehicle 200, or may be calculated based on other detected reference points, such as corner points 2421, as shown in FIG. 24B. A centerline may also be used to represent other lane mark types, such as a double line, using similar techniques as above].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to wherein the display mode of the image of the boundary line is caused to change in accordance with an operation state of a lane centering assist function that assists the vehicle to run along a middle of the traffic lane, as taught by Heilbron, in order to avoid a collision (Heilbron, paragraph 360).
As to claim 7, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 2.
Hato does not disclose a vehicle following distance control function maintains an inter-vehicle distance between the vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle,
a lane centering assist function assists the vehicle to run along [[the]] a middle of a traffic lane and,
when the vehicle following distance control function and the lane centering assist function are operating normally and a condition designated as a condition representing the vehicle being in traffic congestion is satisfied, the processor is further configured to change
Heilbron teaches a vehicle following distance control function maintains an inter-vehicle distance between the vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle [paragraph 360, to maintain a safe distance between two vehicles traveling in the same direction],
a lane centering assist function assists the vehicle to run along a middle of a traffic lane [figures 24A-F, display mode of an image of the boundary line is to differ in accordance with an operation state of a lane centering assist function that assists the vehicle to run along the middle of the traffic lane, paragraph 329, a series of points that may represent a centerline of a given lane mark] and,
when the vehicle following distance control function and the lane centering assist function are operating normally and a condition designated as a condition representing the vehicle being in traffic congestion is satisfied, the processor is further configured to change display modes of the image of the road surface and the image of the boundary line [figures 24A-F, paragraph 370, one or more sensed road conditions (e.g., dirt road, road traction properties, etc.), traffic conditions (congestion level, average distance between vehicle around the host vehicle, rate of cut-ins in front of the host vehicle, etc.), one or more vehicle characteristics, one or more sensed weather conditions, or the like. For example, a processing device may determine a submaximal braking rate that provides the maximum safety and comfort on a snowy road, a submaximal braking rate that provides the maximum safety and comfort on a dry highway, and so forth. It will be appreciated, that while implementing the submaximal braking rate can help increase comfort and have other positive impacts on the behavior of the host vehicle].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to maintain an inter-vehicle distance between the vehicle and a preceding vehicle running in front of the vehicle, a lane centering assist function assists the vehicle to run along a middle of a traffic lane and, when the vehicle following distance control function and the lane centering assist function are operating normally and a condition designated as a condition representing the vehicle being in traffic congestion is satisfied, the processor is further configured to change the display modes of the image of the road surface and the image of the boundary line, as taught by Heilbron, in order to avoid a collision (Heilbron, paragraph 360).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hato in view of Heilbron, further in view of Nagata et al. (US. Pub. No. 2024/0010122, hereinafter “Nagata”).
As to claim 4, (Currently Amended) Hato, as modified by Heilbron, discloses the display control device according to claim 3, further comprising a sensor that is configured to detect
Hato, as modified by Heilbron, does not expressly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to change
Nagata teaches wherein a processor is further configured to change a display mode of an image of a road surface when an accelerator operation is detected by a sensor during operation of the vehicle following distance control function [paragraph 105, an acceleration sensor that detects an acceleration added to the vehicle 1 are provided, paragraph 284, by controlling the display parameters of the line patterns 3 that are the projection patterns 2 in accordance with a speed or the like, it is possible to present the speed or acceleration of the vehicle 1 on the road surface.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to wherein the processor changes the display mode of the image of the road surface when an accelerator operation is detected by the sensor during operation of the vehicle following distance control function, as taught by Nagata, in order to increase the safety walking across the street safely (Nagata, paragraph 282).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hato in view of Heilbron, further in view of Lee et al. (US. Pub. No. 2016/0001780, hereinafter “Lee”).
As to claim 5, (Currently Amended) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 2.
Hato does not disclose wherein, when a condition designated as a condition causing a warning is satisfied, the processor is further configured to perform
Lee teaches when a condition designated as a condition causing a warning is satisfied [figure 11, a warning 1210-1240 is satisfied], the processor is further configured to perform control to set a color of the image of the road surface to a specific color [figure 13, set a color of the image of the road surface to a specific color based on the corresponding warning].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to when a condition designated as a condition causing a warning is satisfied, the processor is further configured to perform control to set a color of the image of the road surface to a specific color, as taught by Lee, in order to recognize a current road surface state (Lee, abstract).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hato in view of Heilbron, further in view of Goto et al. (US. Pub. No. 2018/0099676, hereinafter “Goto”).
As to claim 10, (New) Hato discloses the display control device according to claim 2.
Hato does not disclose wherein the operation state includes an off state in which a driving assistance function is turned off by a button and on states in which the driving assistance function is turned on by a button, and the on states include at least one of (i) a first operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally, (ii) a second operation state in which the driving assistance function is not operating normally, and (iii) a third operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally but an alert is being given to an occupant of the vehicle.
Goto teaches wherein an operation state includes an off state in which a driving assistance function is turned off by a button and on states in which the driving assistance function is turned on by a button [paragraph 80, autonomous driving assistance is terminated when the ACC power is turned off when the user selects to terminate autonomous driving assistance by performing an operation of the various operation buttons 21 mounted on the vehicle, such as the autonomous driving start button, when an override such as a brake operation is detected, or when the vehicle enters a road section where autonomous driving assistance cannot be executed (e.g., a section where lane markings cannot be recognized)], and the on states include at least one of (i) a first operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally [paragraphs 80-81], (ii) a second operation state in which the driving assistance function is not operating normally, and (iii) a third operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally but an alert is being given to an occupant of the vehicle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the display control device of Hato to wherein the operation state includes an off state in which a driving assistance function is turned off by a button and on states in which the driving assistance function is turned on by a button, and the on states include at least one of (i) a first operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally, (ii) a second operation state in which the driving assistance function is not operating normally, and (iii) a third operation state in which the driving assistance function is operating normally but an alert is being given to an occupant of the vehicle, as taught by Goto, in order to allow autonomous driving assistance to be continuously performed without being cancelled (Lee, paragraph 5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combination, teaches or fairly suggests the features presented in the combination limitations of dependent claim 11, such as “wherein the processor is further configured to perform control to recognize whether the operation state is the off state, the first operation state, the second operation state, or the third operation state, by changing display modes of the image of the road surface and images of boundary lines based on a change in the recognized operation state”, recited by claim 11.
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 NAN-YING YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-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, BENJAMIN LEE can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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.
/NAN-YING YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629